Concepts | PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

Public International Law: Concepts

Public International Law is the body of legal rules, norms, and principles that governs the relationships between sovereign states and other international actors, such as international organizations and, to a lesser extent, individuals. This field of law aims to regulate interactions on matters like peace, security, human rights, environmental protection, and trade. In this section, we will delve into key concepts under Public International Law.

1. Definition and Nature of Public International Law

Public International Law refers to the legal framework governing the conduct of states and international organizations in their relations with one another. Unlike national law, which is imposed on individuals by a sovereign, Public International Law primarily applies to sovereign states and other entities such as international organizations.

Key Characteristics:

• Horizontal System: Public International Law operates in a horizontal legal structure. States are considered equals, and there is no central authority to enforce compliance.
• Voluntary Compliance: States are sovereign, meaning they are generally free to accept or reject international obligations. Compliance with international law is often based on consent (through treaties, conventions, etc.).
• Sources of Law: The sources of Public International Law are set out in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and include treaties, customary international law, general principles of law, judicial decisions, and writings of publicists.

2. Sources of Public International Law

The sources of Public International Law serve as the foundation for the rules and norms that govern international relations.

• Treaties: Formal agreements between states that are binding under international law. Examples include bilateral or multilateral treaties, conventions, and protocols.
• Customary International Law: Practices that have evolved over time and are considered legally binding, even if not written down. It arises from a consistent and general practice of states, accepted as law (opinio juris).
• General Principles of Law: Fundamental principles that are recognized by a majority of national legal systems. These may fill gaps when neither treaties nor customary law provide guidance.
• Judicial Decisions and Writings of Publicists: Decisions of international courts, such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and respected legal scholarship can be used as subsidiary means to determine rules of law.

3. Subjects of Public International Law

Subjects of Public International Law are entities capable of possessing international rights and duties. Traditionally, states are the primary subjects, but over time, other actors have gained limited or specialized international legal personality.

• States: The primary and most important subjects. States must possess defined territory, permanent population, government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states (Montevideo Convention, 1933).
• International Organizations: Entities such as the United Nations (UN) or World Trade Organization (WTO) that have international legal personality. Their capacity to act and bind their members is typically derived from treaties.
• Individuals: Under certain circumstances, individuals can also be subjects of international law, particularly in areas such as human rights and international criminal law. For instance, individuals may be held accountable for crimes against humanity, genocide, or war crimes (as seen in cases before the International Criminal Court).
• Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs): While not traditional subjects of international law, NGOs play a significant role in influencing international legal developments, especially in human rights, environmental law, and humanitarian aid.

4. Principles of Public International Law

Several fundamental principles guide the conduct of states and international actors in their relations under Public International Law:

• Sovereignty: The principle of state sovereignty recognizes that states have supreme authority within their own territories. It implies non-interference in the internal affairs of other states, a cornerstone of international relations.
• Equality of States: All states, regardless of size or power, are legally equal in their rights and duties under international law.
• Non-Intervention: States are prohibited from interfering in the internal affairs of other states, including their political, economic, and cultural systems.
• Prohibition of the Use of Force: Under the United Nations Charter, the use of force is generally prohibited unless sanctioned by the UN Security Council or in self-defense.
• Self-Determination of Peoples: This principle allows peoples to freely determine their political status and pursue economic, social, and cultural development. It has been key in decolonization movements and is recognized in human rights law.
• Pacta Sunt Servanda: This principle mandates that treaties and agreements must be honored in good faith. It underscores the binding nature of international treaties once they are accepted by the parties involved.
• Responsibility to Protect (R2P): A more recent principle which holds that the international community has a responsibility to intervene, particularly in cases of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity, if a state is unwilling or unable to protect its population.

5. International Legal Personality

An entity with international legal personality is one capable of possessing rights and duties under international law and can engage in international legal relations. The concept determines who is capable of participating directly in international law processes.

• States: The primary holders of international legal personality.
• International Organizations: Limited legal personality, usually bound by the powers conferred by their member states via treaties.
• Individuals: Limited international legal personality, mostly in areas such as human rights and international criminal law.

6. Jurisdiction in Public International Law

Jurisdiction refers to the legal authority a state or international tribunal has to make and enforce laws. In Public International Law, jurisdiction can take several forms:

• Territorial Jurisdiction: A state has jurisdiction over all persons, property, and activities within its territory.
• Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: States may assert jurisdiction over actions that occur outside their territory, such as crimes committed by their nationals abroad.
• Universal Jurisdiction: Certain crimes, such as piracy, genocide, and crimes against humanity, are so severe that any state may prosecute the offenders, regardless of where the crime was committed or the nationality of the perpetrators.
• Diplomatic Immunity: Under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), diplomats enjoy immunity from the jurisdiction of the host state, but this is balanced by the sending state's duty to respect the laws of the host state.

7. State Responsibility

State responsibility is a fundamental principle of international law, holding states accountable for breaches of their international obligations. If a state violates international law, it must provide reparation, which may take the form of restitution, compensation, or satisfaction.

• Attribution: The conduct must be attributable to the state for it to incur responsibility, typically involving actions by state organs or agents acting on behalf of the state.
• Breach of an Obligation: There must be a violation of an international obligation.
• Consequences: The responsible state may face consequences, such as diplomatic measures, sanctions, or even legal actions before international courts or arbitration.

8. Recognition in International Law

Recognition in international law refers to the acceptance by other states of the legal status of a new state or government.

• De Facto Recognition: Given when a government has control over a state’s territory but lacks long-term stability or full international recognition.
• De Jure Recognition: Granted when a government is recognized as having full legal status and permanence.
• Non-Recognition: Some situations may prompt non-recognition, such as when a state is created through illegal means, such as the use of force, as in cases of occupation or annexation.

9. International Dispute Resolution

Public International Law provides mechanisms to resolve disputes between states or between states and other actors. These mechanisms can be diplomatic or judicial.

• Diplomatic Means: These include negotiation, mediation, conciliation, and arbitration. These approaches rely on mutual agreement between the parties involved.
• Judicial Means: States may resolve disputes through international courts, such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which adjudicates legal disputes submitted by states and gives advisory opinions on legal questions.

---

In conclusion, Public International Law establishes the rules and norms for state interactions and is rooted in principles of state sovereignty, equality, and non-intervention, among others. Its sources include treaties, customary law, and general legal principles, while its subjects encompass states, international organizations, and, to a limited degree, individuals. The principles of Public International Law are essential in maintaining global order and ensuring the peaceful coexistence of states.

Relationship Between International and Philippine Domestic Law | PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW: Relationship Between International and Philippine Domestic Law

The relationship between international law and domestic law in the Philippines involves a complex interaction of principles and legal doctrines. Below is a meticulous breakdown of the subject:

1. Supremacy of the Philippine Constitution

The 1987 Philippine Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Any law, whether domestic or international, must conform to its provisions. Under Article II, Section 2, the Constitution provides the foundation for how international law interacts with domestic law:

“The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.”

This provision recognizes international law as part of Philippine law. However, it is not absolute, as international law is incorporated into domestic law subject to the Constitution's supremacy.

2. Doctrine of Incorporation

The doctrine of incorporation is embodied in Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution. This doctrine states that generally accepted principles of international law are automatically part of the Philippine legal system without the need for legislative action.

2.1. Generally Accepted Principles of International Law

• These include norms of customary international law, jus cogens norms (peremptory norms that no state may derogate from), and other universal legal principles.
• Customary international law becomes binding as part of the law of the land when it meets two requirements: state practice and opinio juris (belief that the practice is legally obligatory).

In this regard, courts may enforce these principles as domestic law even without specific implementing legislation.

3. Doctrine of Transformation

While the doctrine of incorporation applies to customary international law, treaties and other international agreements are governed by the doctrine of transformation, meaning they do not automatically become part of Philippine law. They must be transformed into domestic law through legislative enactment.

3.1. Treaties and International Agreements

Under Article VII, Section 21 of the Constitution, treaties and international agreements must undergo the following process:

• Negotiation and signing by the Executive branch.
• Ratification by the President, subject to the concurrence of at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.

Only after Senate concurrence does a treaty become binding and enforceable as part of Philippine law.

4. Hierarchy between Domestic Law and International Law

4.1. Constitution vs. International Law

The Philippine Constitution remains the highest law in the land. In case of a conflict between a provision of the Constitution and a treaty or an international agreement, the Constitution prevails. This principle is crucial in ensuring the Philippines maintains sovereignty over its domestic legal system, despite its international obligations.

4.2. International Law vs. Statutes

In instances where a statute conflicts with international law, Philippine courts often attempt harmonization. If harmonization is not possible, domestic laws may prevail, especially if the international law is a treaty that has not been transformed into domestic law. However, courts may rule in favor of treaties in cases where no direct conflict with the Constitution exists, based on the principle that the Philippines adheres to its international obligations in good faith.

4.3. Case Law on International Law's Application

• Kuroda v. Jalandoni (1949): The Supreme Court held that the generally accepted principles of international law are automatically incorporated into the Philippine legal system and do not require legislative enactment.
• Mejoff v. Director of Prisons (1951): This case emphasized that international law principles, especially those involving human rights, are incorporated into Philippine law.
• Secretary of Justice v. Lantion (2000): The Court discussed the application of treaties in domestic law, holding that the doctrine of transformation requires Senate concurrence for a treaty to become part of domestic law.

5. International Customary Law

Customary international law, which consists of unwritten rules derived from the consistent practice of states and is binding even without a treaty, is recognized as part of Philippine domestic law under the doctrine of incorporation. The courts may enforce customary international law principles without further legislative action.

5.1. Examples of Customary International Law

• The prohibition of torture.
• The prohibition of slavery and genocide.
• Principles of territorial sovereignty and non-intervention.

6. Philippine Courts and International Law

6.1. Judicial Notice of International Law

Philippine courts may take judicial notice of generally accepted principles of international law. Courts do not require these principles to be proven in the same way that foreign laws or facts would need to be.

6.2. Judicial Interpretation and Application

In interpreting laws, Philippine courts are guided by the principle of pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept), meaning the Philippines, as a member of the international community, must uphold its international obligations in good faith. However, the courts also balance this with the sovereign will of the Filipino people as expressed in the Constitution.

7. Soft Law and International Guidelines

While soft law—such as United Nations declarations, resolutions, and international guidelines—may influence domestic legal interpretations, it is generally not enforceable unless transformed into domestic law. However, these norms often guide judicial decisions and policy-making, especially in areas like human rights and environmental protection.

8. Recent Developments in Philippine Jurisprudence

Philippine courts continue to develop their interpretation of the relationship between international and domestic law, particularly in the context of human rights, environmental law, and international trade. The Philippines’ involvement in the United Nations Human Rights mechanisms, the International Criminal Court, and the World Trade Organization reflect an evolving jurisprudence that seeks to harmonize domestic legal frameworks with international norms and obligations.

8.1. Environmental Law and International Obligations

In Oposa v. Factoran (1993), the Supreme Court ruled that intergenerational responsibility and sustainable development, principles recognized internationally, could be applied domestically to protect the right to a balanced and healthful ecology.

8.2. Human Rights and International Law

The Philippine courts have shown deference to international human rights law in various decisions. For instance, the Writ of Amparo and the Writ of Habeas Data, which protect individuals from human rights abuses, were developed by the Supreme Court based on international human rights principles.

9. Conclusion

In summary, the relationship between international law and Philippine domestic law is primarily governed by the Constitution, which recognizes international law but remains supreme. The doctrine of incorporation applies to customary international law, while the doctrine of transformation governs treaties and international agreements. Philippine courts seek to harmonize international law with domestic law, but in cases of conflict, the Constitution prevails.

International law plays a significant role in the development of Philippine law, especially in human rights, environmental law, and international trade, but always within the context of constitutional supremacy.

International Court of Justice Statute | Sources of International Law | PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

Sources of International Law: International Court of Justice (ICJ) Statute

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), established by the Charter of the United Nations, is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. The ICJ Statute is a key document that defines the Court's functions, including the sources of international law it applies when deciding disputes brought before it. Article 38 of the ICJ Statute is considered one of the most authoritative statements on the sources of international law. Below is a meticulous breakdown of the relevant provisions and doctrines:

Article 38 of the ICJ Statute: Primary Sources of International Law

Article 38(1) of the ICJ Statute enumerates the primary sources of international law that the ICJ is to apply in its adjudication of disputes. These sources are widely accepted as the formal sources of international law:

1. International Conventions (Treaties)
   Article 38(1)(a): International conventions, whether general or particular, establish rules expressly recognized by the states involved in the dispute.

   • Treaties are binding agreements between states or international organizations, and they constitute one of the most significant sources of international law. Treaties may be bilateral, multilateral, or even universal, such as the UN Charter or the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
   • States are only bound by treaties to which they have consented, through ratification, accession, or other formal mechanisms, which are governed by the principle of pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept).

2. International Custom
   Article 38(1)(b): International custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law.

   • Customary international law arises from a consistent practice of states accompanied by opinio juris, the belief that such practice is legally obligatory. Both elements, state practice and opinio juris, must be present for a norm to be recognized as customary law.
   • Customary law binds all states, except those that have persistently objected during the formation of the custom. Examples include the prohibition of the use of force and the rules of international humanitarian law.

3. General Principles of Law
   Article 38(1)(c): The general principles of law recognized by civilized nations.

   • General principles are those legal norms that are common to major legal systems around the world, transcending national boundaries. These principles fill gaps in treaties or customary law and include concepts such as good faith, equity, justice, and due process.
   • They are often invoked in cases where there is no applicable treaty or custom. They help ensure the coherence and comprehensiveness of the legal system.

Subsidiary Sources of International Law

In addition to the primary sources, Article 38(1)(d) mentions subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law:

4. Judicial Decisions and the Teachings of the Most Highly Qualified Publicists
   Article 38(1)(d): Judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law.

   • Judicial decisions from international courts and tribunals, such as the ICJ, International Criminal Court (ICC), or regional courts, are not binding precedents in international law. However, they provide important guidance on how international law is interpreted and applied. The ICJ may also refer to decisions of national courts, but these are not considered binding.
   • Writings of legal scholars and publicists are also considered persuasive but not binding. These may include treatises, legal opinions, and academic commentary by leading authorities in international law. The ICJ often cites these writings to clarify or interpret complex legal principles.

Other Sources of International Law (Not Listed in Article 38)

While not explicitly listed in Article 38, there are other recognized sources of international law that play a role in international relations:

1. Resolutions of International Organizations

   • The UN General Assembly and Security Council resolutions may, in certain contexts, contribute to the development of customary international law or provide evidence of state practice. However, General Assembly resolutions are generally considered non-binding (except in certain situations like binding decisions of the Security Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter).

2. Unilateral Declarations by States

   • In certain cases, unilateral declarations made by states may create legal obligations under international law, provided that these declarations are made publicly and with the intent to be bound (as established by the ICJ in the Nuclear Tests Case).

3. Soft Law Instruments

   • Soft law refers to non-binding norms, guidelines, or principles that may influence state behavior and contribute to the progressive development of international law. These can include declarations, codes of conduct, and policy recommendations adopted by international organizations or conferences.

Hierarchy of Sources under Article 38

• The ICJ Statute does not explicitly provide for a hierarchy between treaties, customary international law, and general principles of law. In practice, the Court considers these sources together and applies them as appropriate to the case. However, treaties generally take precedence when the parties to the dispute have agreed to specific obligations.
• Customary law may serve as a default where no treaty is applicable. General principles fill in the gaps but are rarely invoked as the sole basis for a decision.
• Subsidiary means, such as judicial decisions and teachings, are used primarily for interpretation and clarification, rather than as independent sources of law.

Jus Cogens Norms and Erga Omnes Obligations

Certain norms of international law are considered peremptory or jus cogens, meaning they are mandatory and non-derogable, such as the prohibitions on genocide, slavery, and torture. These norms override conflicting treaties and customs, and no derogation is permitted. Similarly, erga omnes obligations are duties that states owe to the international community as a whole, such as the prohibition of aggression or respect for fundamental human rights.

Conclusion

The sources of international law as outlined in Article 38 of the ICJ Statute form the backbone of how the ICJ and international law in general operate. Treaties, custom, and general principles, supported by judicial decisions and scholarly writings, guide the ICJ in resolving disputes and promoting international justice. The evolution of international law is shaped by both these formal sources and emerging practices like soft law and resolutions of international organizations, reflecting the dynamic nature of international relations.

Corporate Powers | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: CORPORATE POWERS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS (LGUs)

I. Introduction to Corporate Powers of LGUs

Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines, composed of provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays, are granted specific corporate powers under the 1987 Constitution and Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC). These corporate powers enable LGUs to function as corporate entities with distinct legal personalities, allowing them to enter into transactions, contracts, and agreements to carry out their mandates.

The corporate powers of LGUs are essential in empowering local governments to act in their proprietary capacity and achieve local autonomy. Section 22 of the LGC serves as the fundamental provision granting LGUs their corporate powers.

II. General Corporate Powers (Sec. 22, Local Government Code)

Section 22 of the Local Government Code delineates the corporate powers of LGUs as follows:

1. To Have a Continuous Succession in its Corporate Name

   • LGUs have perpetual legal existence under their corporate names, ensuring that they can continue to function as legal entities even as their elected officials change through elections.

2. To Sue and be Sued

   • LGUs can initiate legal actions and defend themselves in court. This power is essential for protecting their interests and enforcing their rights in legal matters, whether in proprietary or governmental capacity.

3. To Have and Use a Corporate Seal

   • LGUs are authorized to adopt and use an official corporate seal, which symbolizes their identity as a legal entity. The corporate seal is affixed to official documents, contracts, and transactions.

4. To Acquire and Convey Real or Personal Property

   • LGUs are empowered to acquire, purchase, hold, lease, or dispose of both real and personal properties. This corporate power allows them to manage public properties, including those necessary for providing public services.

5. To Enter into Contracts

   • LGUs, acting through their local chief executives (e.g., governor, mayor), are authorized to enter into contracts necessary to carry out their governmental and proprietary functions. However, there are statutory and legal restrictions to this power, as LGUs must ensure that their contracts are within their powers, fiscally responsible, and compliant with relevant laws.

III. Limitations on the Corporate Powers of LGUs

While LGUs have broad corporate powers, they are also subject to specific limitations imposed by law, including:

1. Subject to Legal Authority and Council Approval

   • Corporate acts, such as entering into contracts or acquiring property, must generally have the approval of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, Sangguniang Panlungsod, or Sangguniang Bayan (depending on the level of LGU). The local chief executive (e.g., governor, mayor) is the authorized representative in entering contracts, but the legislative council must approve these actions.

2. Comprehensive Financial Authority

   • The power to acquire property and contract obligations is subject to the availability of appropriations and the fiscal management rules. LGUs must operate within their annual budgets, and their contracts should not result in obligations beyond what their resources can sustain.

3. Limitations on Borrowing and Indebtedness

   • LGUs are permitted to contract loans and borrow funds, but this power is heavily regulated by laws such as Republic Act No. 4860 (Foreign Borrowing Act), Republic Act No. 7180 (Local Borrowing Act), and relevant guidelines from the Department of Finance (DOF) and Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF). LGUs are subject to debt ceilings, and borrowing transactions must be approved by the Department of Finance.

4. Expropriation Power

   • As part of its corporate powers, an LGU can exercise eminent domain, or the power to expropriate private property for public use, but only when a public purpose is established. The exercise of this power is also subject to due process and the payment of just compensation to the property owner.

IV. Specific Corporate Acts

1. Contracts and Agreements

• LGUs are authorized to enter into contracts necessary for their operation. These include procurement contracts, public-private partnership (PPP) agreements, supply contracts, construction, leases, and joint ventures. However, all contracts must follow the procurement laws, such as Republic Act No. 9184 (Government Procurement Reform Act), and must be approved by the local legislature.

2. Public-Private Partnerships (PPP)

• LGUs may enter into joint ventures or partnerships with private entities to undertake projects such as infrastructure, transportation, housing, and economic development. The framework for these agreements is governed by guidelines issued by the national government, such as the Public-Private Partnership Center.

3. Issuance of Bonds

• LGUs are empowered to issue bonds, debentures, securities, and other forms of indebtedness to fund projects for economic development. The issuance of such instruments is regulated and requires approval from the Department of Finance to ensure that the LGU has the capacity to repay its debts.

4. Acquisition and Disposal of Property

• LGUs can acquire real or personal property for public use or for their operations. They are also authorized to sell, lease, or dispose of surplus properties following proper legislative approval and processes.

5. Franchise and Licensing

• LGUs may grant franchises, licenses, or permits in areas under their jurisdiction. These grants are typically for businesses, utilities, and services that operate within the locality, such as transport services, markets, and public utilities.

V. Powers in Relation to Economic Enterprises

In their proprietary capacity, LGUs may operate and manage economic enterprises, which generate income for the local government. Examples include public markets, slaughterhouses, parking lots, and public transport terminals. The income derived from these enterprises augments the resources available to LGUs and funds the delivery of basic services.

VI. Oversight and Regulatory Role of National Government

Although LGUs enjoy local autonomy, their corporate powers remain subject to oversight by the national government. Key regulatory bodies include:

• Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG): Provides general supervision over LGUs, ensuring that their corporate powers are exercised in accordance with the law.
• Commission on Audit (COA): Reviews and audits the financial transactions of LGUs to ensure that public funds are spent properly.
• Department of Finance (DOF): Regulates borrowing and other financial activities of LGUs, ensuring that they do not become financially insolvent.

VII. Conclusion

The corporate powers of LGUs, as enshrined in the Local Government Code, are fundamental to their ability to operate both as government entities and as corporate entities. These powers enable LGUs to carry out their mandates, provide services to their constituents, and promote economic development within their jurisdictions. However, LGUs must exercise their corporate powers within the limits imposed by law, with the necessary checks and balances provided by the oversight of national government agencies and local legislative bodies.

Local Legislation | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Local Legislation under the Local Government Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 7160)

Local legislation refers to the authority of local government units (LGUs) to enact laws, referred to as ordinances, and to adopt resolutions that address the needs of the local community within the framework of the law. The powers and responsibilities of LGUs in relation to local legislation are primarily governed by the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC).

The LGUs include the following political subdivisions:

• Provinces
• Cities
• Municipalities
• Barangays

The legislative powers of these LGUs are vested in their respective local legislative bodies:

• Sangguniang Panlalawigan (Provincial Board) for provinces
• Sangguniang Panlungsod (City Council) for cities
• Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council) for municipalities
• Sangguniang Barangay (Barangay Council) for barangays

1. Scope of Local Legislation

Under Section 16 of the Local Government Code, LGUs have the power to legislate for the following purposes:

• General Welfare Clause: The promotion of the health, safety, prosperity, and general welfare of the people within the LGU’s territorial jurisdiction. This broad provision grants LGUs flexibility to enact ordinances addressing diverse concerns, as long as these serve the general welfare.

• Corporate Powers: LGUs, as legal entities, can create policies or rules relating to their proprietary functions. These powers include those that enable the LGU to enter into contracts, manage property, and engage in economic activities for income generation.

2. Legislative Process

The process of enacting ordinances and adopting resolutions involves several key stages:

• Introduction of Ordinance or Resolution: A member of the sanggunian introduces a proposed ordinance or resolution.

• Deliberations and Readings: The ordinance or resolution undergoes several readings and deliberations. This includes:

  • First Reading: Title of the ordinance is read, and it is referred to an appropriate committee for study and recommendation.
  • Second Reading: Deliberation on the ordinance, including amendments and discussions on its merits.
  • Third Reading: Final reading and approval or disapproval of the ordinance or resolution.

• Approval by the Local Chief Executive (LCE):

  • The local chief executive (governor for provinces, mayor for cities and municipalities, and punong barangay for barangays) is given 10 days to approve or veto the proposed ordinance or resolution.
  • If approved, the ordinance is published or posted in public places and becomes law.
  • If vetoed, the sanggunian may override the veto with a two-thirds vote of all its members.

3. Veto Power of the Local Chief Executive

Under Section 55 of the LGC, the LCE may veto an ordinance or resolution within 10 days from receipt. The veto must be based on the following grounds:

• The ordinance or resolution is ultra vires (beyond the powers of the sanggunian).
• It is prejudicial to the public welfare.
• It fails to comply with mandatory procedural requirements.

If the veto is overridden by a two-thirds vote of the sanggunian members, the ordinance becomes effective.

4. Powers of the Local Legislative Bodies

Each level of local government has specific powers granted to their legislative bodies under the LGC, as outlined below:

a. Sangguniang Panlalawigan (Provincial Board)

The Sangguniang Panlalawigan exercises legislative functions over the province. Its powers include:

• Appropriation of funds: Enacting ordinances that authorize the annual budget and other appropriations.
• Regulation of land use: Adopting measures that regulate the use of land within the province for agriculture, industry, and other purposes.
• Imposition of taxes and fees: Levying taxes, fees, and charges, particularly those related to the operation of the provincial government.
• Regulation of natural resources: Enacting ordinances that regulate the extraction and utilization of natural resources within the province.

b. Sangguniang Panlungsod (City Council)

The legislative authority of cities resides in the Sangguniang Panlungsod. In addition to the general powers granted under the LGC, cities have broader authority due to their status as independent or highly urbanized units. Their powers include:

• Taxation and revenue generation: Cities can impose taxes, fees, and charges as allowed under the LGC and other laws.
• Zoning ordinances: Cities can enact zoning ordinances to regulate the use and development of urban land.
• Public utilities and enterprises: City councils have the power to regulate public utilities and franchises operating within their jurisdiction.

c. Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council)

The Sangguniang Bayan serves as the legislative body of the municipality. Its powers are similar to those of cities but are limited to the municipality's jurisdiction. These powers include:

• Adopting ordinances for municipal development: Such as regulations on sanitation, waste management, and local economic enterprises.
• Taxation: Imposing taxes and fees that apply to the municipality.
• Issuance of permits and licenses: Municipal councils regulate local business operations through the issuance of permits and licenses.

d. Sangguniang Barangay (Barangay Council)

The Sangguniang Barangay, being the legislative body of the barangay, exercises more limited legislative functions, which include:

• Enactment of barangay ordinances: Ordinances that directly affect the day-to-day activities of barangay residents, including peace and order, sanitation, and local community projects.
• Issuance of barangay clearance: Barangays regulate small-scale local businesses and construction projects by issuing clearances and permits.

5. Limitations and Requirements on Local Legislation

While LGUs enjoy substantial legislative autonomy, their powers are subject to certain limitations, including:

a. Consistency with National Law

Local ordinances must be consistent with the Constitution and national laws. Under the principle of preemption, national law prevails over conflicting local ordinances.

b. Compliance with Procedural Requirements

Ordinances must go through the prescribed legislative process. Failure to comply with procedural requirements, such as public hearings for certain ordinances (e.g., zoning or taxation ordinances), renders the ordinances invalid.

c. Publication and Effectivity

For an ordinance to take effect, it must be published in a newspaper of general circulation or posted in prominent public places in the LGU, depending on the type of LGU and the ordinance involved (Section 59, LGC).

d. Judicial Review

Local ordinances are subject to judicial review. Courts may declare ordinances invalid if found to be beyond the powers of the LGU (ultra vires), unconstitutional, or in violation of statutory requirements.

6. Local Legislative Autonomy and Control

a. Autonomy

LGUs enjoy autonomy, particularly in the formulation of local policies through local legislation. This autonomy is enshrined in the Constitution and the Local Government Code, which recognize the right of LGUs to govern themselves and make laws for their local communities.

b. Supervisory Control

The President, through the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), exercises general supervision over LGUs to ensure that their actions are within the scope of their powers and in accordance with the law. Supervision does not extend to control, which means that the national government cannot directly interfere with the actions of LGUs unless these are illegal or outside the bounds of their authority.

7. Challenges in Local Legislation

LGUs often face various challenges in local legislation, including:

• Limited financial resources that affect their ability to implement local ordinances.
• Conflicting interests between local officials and their constituents.
• Political pressures that may influence legislative decisions.

Conclusion

Local legislation is a critical component of governance in the Philippines, allowing LGUs to exercise self-governance and respond to the specific needs of their constituents. While LGUs are granted broad legislative powers, they must operate within the constraints of national law and constitutional principles. The Local Government Code provides the framework for the legislative process, and LGUs must ensure compliance with both substantive and procedural requirements for their ordinances to be valid and effective.

Closure and Opening of Roads | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Closure and Opening of Roads by Local Government Units (LGUs)

The power to open and close roads, streets, alleys, and other similar passageways is a significant function vested in Local Government Units (LGUs) under the Local Government Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 7160). This power is crucial as it directly affects the local community’s mobility, development, and public welfare. Below is a comprehensive legal discussion of this topic:

---

I. Legal Basis

The power of LGUs to open or close roads is provided under the following provisions of Republic Act No. 7160:

• Section 21: Closure and Opening of Roads
• Section 10: Limitations on Closure of Roads

These provisions outline the legal requirements and limitations that an LGU must observe in exercising this power.

---

II. Power to Open Roads

The Local Government Code grants LGUs the power to open new roads or other similar passageways as part of their general welfare functions and development programs. This includes the power to construct and maintain public roads and other infrastructure projects within their territorial jurisdiction.

• Scope of Power: The opening of new roads generally involves the planning and development of new streets and passageways for public use, which can be necessary for urban expansion, access to public services, or promoting economic development.

• Initiative Process: The LGU, through its legislative body (Sangguniang Bayan/Panlungsod/Barangay), may initiate the opening of a road. This action typically follows urban planning or development needs, or a public petition may request it.

• Funding: The funds for opening new roads may come from the LGU’s development funds, national government subsidies, or external grants, provided they are consistent with national development priorities.

---

III. Power to Close Roads

The closure of roads, streets, alleys, or other passageways is more complex and subject to strict legal limitations. Closure can be permanent or temporary, depending on the reasons for closure.

1. Permanent Closure

Permanent closure refers to the cessation of a road’s status as public property and its conversion to private use or another form of public property use.

• Section 21(a) of the Local Government Code: This provision outlines the general authority of the LGU to permanently close roads, streets, or alleys provided that they are no longer necessary for public use.

• Procedure for Permanent Closure:

  1. Public Hearing: Before the permanent closure of any road, street, or alley, the LGU is required to conduct a public hearing with the residents of the community who may be affected by the closure. The public hearing ensures transparency and provides the community an opportunity to voice their concerns.

  2. Ordinance: After conducting the necessary public hearing, the local Sanggunian (Sangguniang Panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan) must enact an ordinance to authorize the closure of the road. The ordinance is the legal instrument that formalizes the closure.

  3. Concurrence of National Agencies: If the road in question is part of a national highway or otherwise falls under the jurisdiction of a national government agency (such as the Department of Public Works and Highways or the Department of Transportation), the LGU must secure the concurrence of the concerned national agency before closure.

• Disposition of Property: Once closed, the property may be reclassified as patrimonial property, meaning the LGU can dispose of or use the property for another purpose (e.g., for housing projects, commercial developments, etc.). However, there is a restriction: the property may be sold only to the owners of the adjoining land at a reasonable price if it is no longer needed for public use.

2. Temporary Closure

Temporary closure is typically done for specific events or purposes and does not change the legal status of the road as public property.

• Section 21(b) of the Local Government Code: This provision allows LGUs to temporarily close and regulate the use of any local street, road, or alley during public events like fiestas, parades, and other similar occasions.

• Procedure for Temporary Closure:

  1. The LGU may pass a resolution or issue an executive order for the temporary closure of a road or street for a specific period.
  2. There is no requirement for a public hearing for temporary closure, but proper public notice should be provided to ensure minimal disruption to the community.

• Common Uses for Temporary Closure:

  • Community events like fiestas, parades, and other celebrations.
  • Maintenance and repair work on roads and infrastructure.
  • Public safety concerns during emergencies or calamities.

---

IV. Limitations and Restrictions

While LGUs have the power to open and close roads, there are legal limitations and restrictions imposed to protect the public's interest and ensure accountability. These limitations are crucial to prevent arbitrary closures that could harm public welfare.

1. Necessity for Public Use (Section 21(a))

A road, street, or alley may be closed permanently only if it is no longer needed for public use. This criterion protects the public from being deprived of essential access routes, especially in densely populated areas where road space is scarce.

2. Requirement for Public Hearing

The mandatory public hearing for permanent closures ensures public participation and transparency in the decision-making process. The affected residents must be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard before the closure is finalized.

3. Compensation for Affected Parties

In cases where the closure of a road results in the impairment of access to a property or negatively impacts a business or residence, the LGU may be required to compensate the affected parties. This requirement stems from the constitutional provision that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation (Article III, Section 9 of the Philippine Constitution).

4. Restrictions on Sale of Closed Roads

Under Section 10 of the Local Government Code, if a permanently closed road is no longer required for public use, it may only be sold to owners of the adjacent properties. This limitation ensures that public property is not disposed of without due consideration of those who may be most affected by its closure.

---

V. Other Relevant Considerations

1. National vs. Local Roads

LGUs only have jurisdiction over local roads within their territorial boundaries. National roads, which are under the jurisdiction of the national government, may only be closed or modified with the consent of the appropriate national agency, such as the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).

2. Public Safety and Welfare

The closure or opening of roads must always consider public safety and welfare. Roads used for evacuation, emergency response, or essential public services should not be closed unless absolutely necessary, and alternative routes must be provided.

3. Judicial Review

Decisions to open or close roads are subject to judicial review. If an LGU’s action is deemed arbitrary, discriminatory, or in violation of due process, affected individuals or entities may challenge the closure or opening before the courts. LGUs must ensure that all actions comply with procedural and substantive due process requirements.

---

Conclusion

The power of Local Government Units to close and open roads is a significant tool for urban planning and development, but it is subject to several legal requirements and limitations. LGUs must ensure that closures and openings are conducted transparently, with due regard for public welfare, property rights, and procedural fairness. The legal framework provided by the Local Government Code of 1991 ensures that this power is exercised within a balanced system that respects both public and private interests.

Taxing Power | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Taxing Power of Local Government Units (LGUs) Under Political Law and Public International Law

Constitutional and Statutory Framework

The taxing power of Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines is derived primarily from Section 5, Article X of the 1987 Constitution, which grants LGUs the power to create their own sources of revenue. This is further elaborated in Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC), which provides the legal framework for the taxing power of LGUs.

The constitutional provision empowers LGUs to:

1. Exercise their taxing power directly, subject to the limitations established by law;
2. Create their own sources of revenue;
3. Levy taxes, fees, and charges as provided under the Local Government Code;
4. Allocate shares in the national taxes, through mechanisms such as the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA), now termed as the National Tax Allotment (NTA) under the Mandanas-Garcia ruling.

Scope and Limitations of LGU Taxing Power

1. General Rule on Taxation (Sec. 129, LGC)

LGUs are empowered to create their own sources of revenue and to levy taxes, fees, and charges within their territorial jurisdictions, subject to limitations outlined in the Local Government Code and other special laws.

2. Limitations on LGU Taxing Power

LGU taxing powers are not absolute. The Constitution and the Local Government Code place various limitations on the exercise of these powers, including:

• Non-delegability: The power to tax cannot be delegated to private entities.
• Uniformity and Equality: Taxes must be uniform and equitable within the LGU's jurisdiction.
• Public Purpose Requirement: Taxes must be levied for a public purpose.
• Constitutional and Statutory Prohibitions: LGUs are prohibited from levying certain taxes, such as those explicitly reserved for the national government (e.g., income tax, customs duties).

3. Specific Taxes that LGUs Can Levy

Sections 134 to 151 of the Local Government Code enumerate the specific taxes that LGUs are empowered to impose. These include:

• Provinces:

  • Tax on transfer of real property ownership.
  • Tax on businesses engaged in the printing and publication of books and other materials.
  • Franchise taxes on businesses operating within the province.
  • Tax on sand, gravel, and other quarry resources.
  • Professional tax.

• Cities:

  • Cities are granted broader taxing powers, allowing them to levy all the taxes that provinces and municipalities can impose, including additional revenue-generating mechanisms like amusement taxes.

• Municipalities:

  • Tax on business establishments within their jurisdiction (such as manufacturers, retailers, and wholesalers).
  • Fees and charges on business registrations and services provided by the municipality.

• Barangays:

  • Tax on stores or retailers with a gross sales of Php 50,000 or less within cities or Php 30,000 or less within municipalities.
  • Service fees for services rendered by barangay officials or employees.

Procedures and Requirements for Taxation by LGUs

The Local Government Code outlines the procedural requirements for LGUs when exercising their taxing powers:

• Ordinance Requirement: Taxes can only be imposed through ordinances enacted by the sanggunian of the LGU concerned.
• Publication and Public Hearing: Before the imposition of taxes, the proposed ordinance must be published, and a public hearing must be conducted to allow taxpayers to voice their concerns.
• Tax Rates and Bases: The tax rates and bases are established by law, and LGUs may not exceed the statutory limits.

Taxation and Public International Law

Under public international law, LGUs must ensure that their taxing ordinances do not violate international treaties and obligations to which the Philippines is a party. For instance:

• Non-Discrimination: LGUs cannot impose taxes that discriminate against foreign entities or individuals in violation of international treaties or agreements.
• Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs): Taxation measures affecting foreign investors must comply with the protections provided in BITs, such as fair and equitable treatment and non-expropriation without compensation.

National Tax Allotment (NTA) and the Mandanas-Garcia Ruling

The Supreme Court decision in the Mandanas-Garcia case significantly affected the fiscal autonomy of LGUs by ruling that LGUs are entitled to a larger share of the national taxes. The Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) was reinterpreted to include all national taxes, not just internal revenue taxes. The implementation of this ruling, which began in 2022, increased the fiscal resources available to LGUs, thus impacting their capacity to deliver services and fund local projects, including those supported by their own taxing powers.

Collection and Remedies

1. Taxpayer Remedies:

Taxpayers who wish to contest the legality or validity of taxes imposed by LGUs can file:

• Administrative appeals before the Secretary of Finance or the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), depending on the issue.
• Judicial remedies via a petition for review in courts, typically starting at the Regional Trial Court.

2. LGU’s Power to Collect:

LGUs have the authority to enforce the collection of local taxes, fees, and charges through:

• Issuance of warrants of distraint and levy;
• Civil action for collection in courts;
• Administrative remedies, including imposing interest and penalties for non-payment.

Autonomy and Fiscal Responsibility

While the taxing power of LGUs enhances local autonomy, they are also held to standards of accountability and fiscal responsibility:

• Audit and Oversight: The Commission on Audit (COA) audits LGUs to ensure proper management and expenditure of locally generated funds.
• Limitations on Borrowing and Debt Servicing: LGUs are subject to debt ceilings, and their capacity to borrow is contingent on their ability to generate revenues.

Conclusion

The taxing power of LGUs under the Philippine legal system is an essential component of local autonomy, allowing provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays to create their own revenue sources. This power is framed by constitutional, statutory, and regulatory guidelines to ensure proper, equitable, and responsible use. However, while LGUs enjoy broad taxing powers, these are subject to various limitations, including respect for national policies and international obligations.

Eminent Domain | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Eminent Domain: Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines

Eminent domain refers to the inherent power of the State to take or expropriate private property for public use, upon payment of just compensation. Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, this power is granted to various levels of government, including local government units (LGUs), subject to specific limitations and conditions.

Legal Framework

1. Constitutional Basis
   The power of eminent domain is grounded in Section 9, Article III (Bill of Rights) of the 1987 Constitution, which provides:
   "Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation."

2. Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160)
   The Local Government Code (LGC) expressly grants LGUs the power to exercise eminent domain. This power is provided for in Section 19 of the LGC, subject to certain requirements.

Requisites for the Exercise of Eminent Domain by LGUs

To validly exercise the power of eminent domain, the following conditions must be satisfied:

1. Public Use or Purpose
   The taking of property must be for a public use or purpose. Public use has been broadly interpreted to include purposes that benefit the public at large, such as roads, parks, public buildings, and infrastructure projects. In Manapat v. CA (G.R. No. 110478, November 16, 1995), the Supreme Court affirmed that even if only a portion of the public is benefited, the requirement of public use can be satisfied.

2. Necessity
   There must be a showing of genuine necessity for the taking of the property. The power of eminent domain is not a blanket authority to take property without regard to necessity. The taking must be indispensable to achieve the stated public purpose. In Moday v. CA (G.R. No. 107916, February 20, 1997), the Supreme Court ruled that necessity is a condition precedent in the exercise of eminent domain by LGUs.

3. Ordinance of the Local Sanggunian
   The exercise of eminent domain by an LGU must be authorized by an ordinance enacted by the local sanggunian (legislative body). This requirement is stated in Section 19 of the Local Government Code. Without such an ordinance, any attempt to expropriate property will be considered invalid.

4. Payment of Just Compensation
   Just compensation must be paid to the owner of the property taken. Just compensation is generally the fair market value of the property at the time of the taking. In National Power Corporation v. CA (G.R. No. 106804, August 12, 2004), the Supreme Court clarified that the determination of just compensation is a judicial function, and the courts have the final say on what constitutes just compensation.

5. Judicial Intervention
   The power of eminent domain involves judicial intervention. If the owner of the property does not consent to the taking, the LGU must file an expropriation case before the Regional Trial Court (RTC). The court then determines whether the requisites for expropriation are present and fixes the amount of just compensation.

Procedure for Expropriation by LGUs

1. Preliminary Steps

   • Authorization by Ordinance: The local sanggunian must pass an ordinance authorizing the expropriation of the property.
   • Good Faith Negotiation: Before proceeding with the filing of an expropriation case, the LGU is required to enter into a good faith negotiation with the property owner for the purchase of the property. This is a mandatory requirement under Section 19 of the Local Government Code.

2. Filing of Complaint
   If no agreement is reached with the property owner, the LGU may file a complaint for expropriation in the RTC having jurisdiction over the property. The complaint must state the public use for which the property is being taken and other facts to justify the expropriation.

3. Writ of Possession
   Upon filing the complaint and after depositing an amount equivalent to 15% of the fair market value of the property (based on the current tax declaration), the court may issue a writ of possession authorizing the LGU to take immediate possession of the property. This is allowed under Rule 67 of the Rules of Court, which governs expropriation proceedings.

4. Hearing on the Expropriation Case
   The court will then conduct a hearing to determine whether the taking is for a public purpose and whether the requisites of eminent domain have been satisfied. If the court finds in favor of the LGU, the expropriation will proceed.

5. Determination of Just Compensation
   After ruling on the propriety of the expropriation, the court will determine the just compensation due to the property owner. This is done by appointing commissioners who will assess the value of the property.

6. Payment of Just Compensation
   The LGU must pay the amount determined by the court as just compensation. Payment of just compensation is a condition precedent to the transfer of ownership of the property to the LGU.

Limitations on the Power of Eminent Domain by LGUs

1. Delegated Power
   The power of eminent domain, while inherent to the State, is merely delegated to LGUs. This means that LGUs can only exercise eminent domain within the bounds set by law, specifically the Local Government Code. Any expropriation beyond these bounds is ultra vires (beyond its powers) and invalid.

2. Use of Public Property
   LGUs cannot exercise eminent domain to expropriate property that is already devoted to a public use unless there is a clear showing that the existing public use will not be interfered with or unless the property is no longer necessary for the public purpose for which it was originally intended.

3. Specific Projects
   The courts have emphasized that the power of eminent domain must not be used arbitrarily. The LGU must identify specific projects or purposes for the taking of property. In Lagcao v. Judge Labra (G.R. No. 155746, October 13, 2004), the Supreme Court ruled that the LGU must sufficiently identify the public use or project that necessitates the exercise of eminent domain.

Notable Supreme Court Cases on Eminent Domain by LGUs

1. Municipality of Paranaque v. V.M. Realty Corp. (G.R. No. 127820, July 20, 1998)
   In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the taking of private property for a public market, which was intended to promote the public welfare, was a valid exercise of the power of eminent domain by the Municipality of Parañaque. However, the Court emphasized the importance of a proper ordinance authorizing the expropriation.

2. Moday v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 107916, February 20, 1997)
   This case involved the expropriation of private property for a resettlement project. The Supreme Court held that necessity is a condition precedent in the exercise of eminent domain. The LGU must show that the property is necessary for the public purpose it seeks to achieve.

3. City of Manila v. Judge Lagdameo (G.R. No. L-25461, October 31, 1969)
   The Supreme Court ruled that the power of eminent domain must be exercised within the territorial jurisdiction of the LGU. In this case, the City of Manila attempted to expropriate property outside its territorial limits, which the Court declared invalid.

Conclusion

The power of eminent domain is a crucial tool for local governments in the Philippines, allowing them to take private property for public purposes, subject to stringent requirements and judicial oversight. LGUs must comply with constitutional and statutory limitations, such as ensuring public use, demonstrating necessity, providing just compensation, and securing proper authorization through a local ordinance. These safeguards protect property owners from arbitrary takings while enabling LGUs to pursue projects that benefit the community.

Police Power | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: POLICE POWER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS (LGUs)

I. Legal Basis for Police Power of LGUs

1. The 1987 Constitution
Article X, Section 5 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution grants Local Government Units (LGUs) the authority to exercise police power. It provides that “each local government unit shall have the power to create its own sources of revenues and to levy taxes, fees, and charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy.”

2. Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160)
The Local Government Code (LGC) serves as the enabling law for the exercise of LGU powers, particularly police power.

• Section 16 (General Welfare Clause) – It is the most important provision in the Local Government Code in relation to police power. This clause states:
  • "Every local government unit shall exercise the powers expressly granted, those necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective governance, and those which are essential to the promotion of the general welfare."
  • It continues, "LGUs shall ensure and support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment of culture, promote health and safety, enhance the right of the people to a balanced ecology, encourage and support the development of appropriate and self-reliant scientific and technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance economic prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among their residents, maintain peace and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their inhabitants."

This broad provision encapsulates the police power of LGUs, allowing them to enact ordinances to promote the general welfare of the community.

II. Nature and Scope of Police Power

1. Definition of Police Power
Police power is the inherent power of the state to regulate behavior and enforce order within its territory to ensure public welfare, health, safety, and morals. When exercised by LGUs, this power must be consistent with the local autonomy guaranteed by the Constitution and the limitations set by national law.

2. Scope of LGU’s Police Power
The exercise of police power by LGUs covers a wide range of regulatory measures that aim to promote the general welfare. These include, but are not limited to:

• Public safety – Ordinances concerning traffic regulations, fire safety measures, regulation of public utilities, prevention of crimes, etc.
• Public health – Regulations on sanitation, control of infectious diseases, garbage disposal, regulation of businesses affecting health (e.g., slaughterhouses, restaurants), quarantine measures.
• Public morals – Ordinances against gambling, prostitution, and establishments that promote vice.
• Public convenience – Regulations on transportation, market operations, and other services that affect the daily convenience of the residents.
• Environmental protection – Ordinances that control pollution, protect ecological balance, and regulate the use of natural resources.

III. Requisites for a Valid Exercise of Police Power by LGUs

For an ordinance or regulation issued by an LGU to be considered a valid exercise of police power, it must meet the following requisites:

1. Lawful Subject
The subject of the ordinance must be within the scope of the LGU’s police power, meaning that it must pertain to public health, safety, morals, welfare, or convenience. The objective must align with the promotion of the general welfare of the local government unit.

2. Lawful Means
The ordinance or regulation must be reasonable and not oppressive. It must not unduly infringe on constitutional rights and should employ means that are reasonably necessary to achieve its purpose.

3. Territorial Application
An ordinance enacted under police power by an LGU can only have effect within its territorial jurisdiction. The power must be exercised within the geographical limits of the local government.

IV. Limitations on the Exercise of Police Power

Despite the wide latitude granted to LGUs, their exercise of police power is subject to several limitations:

1. Subordination to National Law
Ordinances or regulations passed by LGUs must not contravene national laws or policies. If there is a conflict between an ordinance and a national statute, the latter will prevail. For example, local ordinances that contradict the provisions of laws like the Clean Air Act (R.A. 8749) or Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Act (R.A. 9262) will be deemed void.

2. Respect for Constitutional Rights
The exercise of police power must not infringe upon constitutional rights, such as the right to due process, equal protection, or freedom of speech. Any ordinance that violates these rights may be struck down by the courts.

3. Requirement of Due Process and Equal Protection
Ordinances must comply with the requirements of due process. This means that there must be sufficient public hearings or consultations, and affected individuals or entities must be given notice. The ordinance must also apply equally to all persons or entities similarly situated to avoid a violation of the equal protection clause.

V. Legislative and Executive Aspects of Police Power in LGUs

1. Legislative Power
The Sanggunians (Sangguniang Bayan, Sangguniang Panlungsod, Sangguniang Panlalawigan) are the legislative bodies of local governments. They are empowered under the Local Government Code to pass ordinances that regulate aspects of local life. Through these ordinances, the Sanggunian exercises police power on behalf of the LGU.

2. Executive Power
The Local Chief Executive (Governor, Mayor, or Barangay Captain) implements these ordinances. For instance, a mayor may issue executive orders to regulate traffic or market operations, which are considered part of police power when carried out pursuant to an ordinance or national law.

VI. Judicial Review of Police Power Ordinances

While LGUs enjoy a wide scope of discretion in the exercise of police power, their acts are subject to judicial review. Courts can strike down ordinances or executive actions that are:

• Ultra vires (beyond the powers of the LGU),
• Unreasonable or oppressive, or
• In violation of constitutional rights or national statutes.

The courts will examine whether the ordinance serves a legitimate public interest, whether the means employed are reasonable, and whether the ordinance respects the fundamental rights of individuals.

VII. Specific Illustrations of LGU Police Power

1. Traffic Regulations
   LGUs regularly pass ordinances regulating traffic, such as setting speed limits, prescribing routes for vehicles, or prohibiting certain types of vehicles from using specific roads. These ordinances aim to promote public safety.

2. Sanitation Ordinances
   LGUs have the authority to regulate public markets, restaurants, slaughterhouses, and other establishments affecting public health. These regulations may include setting hygiene standards, waste disposal requirements, and health certificates for workers.

3. Regulation of Business Establishments
   LGUs may require business permits and impose regulations on businesses within their jurisdiction. They can regulate the operation of entertainment venues, alcohol sale restrictions, or zoning ordinances that control where certain businesses can operate.

4. Environmental Protection
   Some LGUs have passed ordinances banning the use of plastic bags or regulating waste disposal to protect the environment and promote public welfare. Such measures, when reasonable and in line with national environmental laws, are a valid exercise of police power.

VIII. Conclusion

The police power of Local Government Units is an indispensable part of their role in governance and in promoting the general welfare of their constituents. While broad in scope, this power is tempered by national law, the Constitution, and the requirements of reasonableness, equality, and fairness. Through ordinances and regulations, LGUs can address local concerns on public health, safety, morals, and convenience, all in the name of public interest and community welfare.

Autonomous Regions and their Relation to the National Government | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

XV. LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

C. Autonomous Regions and their Relation to the National Government

1. Constitutional Basis for Autonomous Regions

The establishment of autonomous regions in the Philippines is grounded in the 1987 Philippine Constitution, specifically in Article X, Sections 15 to 21. These provisions mandate the creation of autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras to allow for self-governance within the framework of national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

• Article X, Section 15: Recognizes the necessity of forming autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras.
• Article X, Section 16: Grants autonomous regions their own organic act, which serves as the constitution of the region, defining its political structure and scope of powers.
• Article X, Section 17: Establishes the legislative powers of the regional legislative assembly, which includes the authority to legislate on matters not covered by national law, as long as such legislation is consistent with the Constitution and national laws.
• Article X, Section 18: Provides for the creation of regional executive departments, agencies, and other instrumentalities. The heads of these entities must come from the autonomous regions themselves, with supervision from the President of the Philippines as required by law.
• Article X, Section 19: Emphasizes the equitable share of the autonomous regions in the national taxes, ensuring that local government units (LGUs) within these regions receive their due Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) and other funds from the National Government.
• Article X, Section 20: Grants the autonomous regions powers over matters of internal governance, economic planning, and development, but reserves to the National Government essential functions such as defense, foreign affairs, and postal services.

2. Autonomous Regions: Muslim Mindanao and Cordillera

The Philippines has two constitutionally recognized autonomous regions: the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) and a still-to-be-formed autonomous region in the Cordilleras.

A. Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM)

• Legal Framework: Republic Act No. 11054, or the "Organic Law for the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao" (Bangsamoro Organic Law), enacted pursuant to Article X of the 1987 Constitution, serves as the BARMM's governing law.

• Powers of the BARMM: The Bangsamoro Organic Law grants BARMM both exclusive and concurrent powers. Exclusive powers include legislation on Shariah law (for Muslims), ancestral domain, customary law, and natural resources, among others. Concurrent powers are shared with the national government in areas such as social security, education, and health.

• Government Structure: BARMM has a parliamentary form of government, unique within the Philippines. The Bangsamoro Parliament enacts laws and oversees an executive body led by a Chief Minister. This is distinct from the more common presidential form of government used in the rest of the country.

• Fiscal Autonomy: BARMM enjoys fiscal autonomy, meaning it has a block grant equivalent to 5% of the net internal revenue collection of the Bureau of Internal Revenue and the Bureau of Customs. This ensures stable financial support from the National Government, in addition to its own locally generated revenues and share in the utilization of natural resources within its jurisdiction.

B. Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR)

The Cordilleras, despite multiple attempts, has yet to establish a fully autonomous region. The 1987 Constitution envisions an autonomous region in the Cordilleras, but no organic law establishing autonomy has passed the required plebiscites. The current administrative structure, the Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR), is an interim arrangement pending the creation of a formal autonomous government through an enabling law.

3. Relationship Between Autonomous Regions and the National Government

The relationship between autonomous regions and the National Government is characterized by autonomy in local governance but within the limits set by national sovereignty and law. This involves the following dynamics:

A. Supervision by the President

While autonomous regions have extensive powers over local governance, the President of the Philippines retains supervisory authority to ensure that laws and policies comply with the Constitution. This supervisory power allows the President to intervene in cases where actions or laws of the autonomous regions contravene national interests, but such intervention is limited to ensuring compliance with constitutional provisions and does not extend to day-to-day governance.

B. Reserved Powers of the National Government

Autonomous regions have no jurisdiction over certain powers that remain with the National Government. These include:

• Defense and national security: The national government maintains control over military defense, internal and external security.

• Foreign relations: The autonomous regions cannot engage in foreign diplomacy or enter into treaties or international agreements independently of the national government.

• Monetary and fiscal policy: Autonomous regions cannot establish their own currency or central banks, and they remain part of the national economic system.

C. National Laws and Local Legislation

Legislation enacted by the regional legislative bodies must comply with the Constitution and national laws. The Supreme Court may review regional legislation to ensure constitutionality, and any conflict between regional laws and national laws is resolved in favor of the latter.

D. Judicial System

While autonomous regions may establish their own courts for matters within their jurisdiction (e.g., Shariah courts in BARMM for Muslim family and personal law), the Philippine judiciary retains ultimate authority, particularly in constitutional interpretation and matters affecting national law.

E. Public Order and Safety

Autonomous regions have the power to maintain public order and safety within their jurisdictions through their local police forces. However, these forces are subject to supervision and coordination with the national police and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG).

4. Autonomy vs. Local Government Units

Autonomous regions are distinct from ordinary local government units (LGUs) in the Philippines. While LGUs (provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays) enjoy a certain degree of local autonomy under the Local Government Code (Republic Act No. 7160), autonomous regions have significantly broader powers. They are empowered by their organic laws to govern independently in areas such as education, health, and ancestral domains, subject to the limitations imposed by the national government and the Constitution.

5. Challenges in the Implementation of Autonomy

Despite constitutional guarantees, the practical implementation of autonomy has faced challenges, including:

• Inconsistent funding: Although autonomous regions are entitled to a block grant, delays in fund disbursement and coordination issues with national agencies can hamper regional development.

• Conflicts between regional and national laws: Disputes occasionally arise over whether regional laws encroach on national government functions or violate the Constitution.

• Security and peacekeeping: In regions like Muslim Mindanao, peacekeeping efforts remain a challenge due to the long history of insurgency and conflict.

6. Conclusion

Autonomous regions in the Philippines, such as BARMM, play a critical role in recognizing the unique cultural, historical, and political contexts of certain areas while balancing the country's national unity and sovereignty. Their relationship with the National Government is founded on constitutional principles that aim to empower local governance while safeguarding national interests.

Principles of Local Autonomy | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Principles of Local Autonomy in the Philippines

Local autonomy is enshrined in the 1987 Philippine Constitution and operationalized through the Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160). It is a foundational principle in the governance of local government units (LGUs), and it serves as a key pillar for decentralization, granting LGUs the ability to manage their own affairs. Below is a meticulous discussion of the key aspects, legal foundations, and principles of local autonomy in the Philippines:

1. Constitutional Framework

The 1987 Philippine Constitution explicitly recognizes local autonomy, with the following key provisions:

• Article II, Section 25: "The State shall ensure the autonomy of local governments."
• Article X, Section 2: "The territorial and political subdivisions shall enjoy local autonomy."
• Article X, Section 3: "The Congress shall enact a local government code which shall provide for a more responsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a system of decentralization..."

These constitutional provisions underscore the commitment of the Philippine government to decentralize power from the national government to LGUs.

2. Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160)

The Local Government Code (LGC) is the main legal framework implementing the principle of local autonomy. It details the structure, powers, functions, and responsibilities of LGUs, as well as the mechanisms for fiscal autonomy and intergovernmental relations. Key provisions include:

• Devolution of Powers and Functions: The LGC devolves certain powers from the national government to LGUs, such as health services, agricultural extension services, social welfare services, public works and highways, environmental management, and more.

• Autonomous Power of LGUs: The Code grants LGUs the authority to create their own sources of revenue, such as taxes, fees, and charges, in addition to receiving their share from national taxes (Internal Revenue Allotment or IRA, now termed National Tax Allotment or NTA after the Mandanas-Garcia ruling).

• Corporate Powers: LGUs have the power to sue and be sued, to acquire and convey real or personal property, and to enter into contracts.

3. Mandanas-Garcia Ruling (GR No. 199802, 2018)

A landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the Philippines expanded the fiscal autonomy of LGUs. The ruling interpreted the term “just share” in the context of the IRA to include all national taxes, not just those collected by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR). This decision effectively increased the revenue share of LGUs and further empowered them to pursue independent local development initiatives.

4. Decentralization as a Pillar of Local Autonomy

Decentralization refers to the process of redistributing powers from the central government to local governments. It has two major forms:

• Devolution: A transfer of powers, responsibilities, and resources from the national government to LGUs. LGUs are empowered to manage local affairs such as health, education, and infrastructure, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.

• Deconcentration: A weaker form of decentralization, where administrative powers are delegated to regional or local offices of the national government. In this case, LGUs have less control and autonomy.

5. Key Principles of Local Autonomy

The principle of local autonomy in the Philippines can be dissected into the following core aspects:

A. Political Autonomy

Political autonomy is reflected in the LGUs’ capacity to:

• Elect their own local officials, as provided by Article X, Section 8 of the Constitution.
• Formulate their own local policies, ordinances, and resolutions to address the unique needs of their communities, as authorized by the LGC.

B. Administrative Autonomy

LGUs have the autonomy to administer and implement policies in their jurisdiction. The Code empowers LGUs to:

• Enact local ordinances and perform legislative functions through their Sanggunian.
• Manage personnel, including hiring and discipline of local employees.
• Organize and reorganize their local offices in accordance with the needs of the community.

C. Fiscal Autonomy

Fiscal autonomy is one of the most critical components of local autonomy. The LGC provides for:

• The right to generate and control local revenues, such as through local taxation (property tax, business tax, etc.) and fees.
• A guaranteed share of national taxes through the National Tax Allotment (NTA). LGUs receive a portion of national taxes automatically.
• The power to incur loans and contract debt for local projects.
• Local governments can also enter into Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) to fund local infrastructure projects.

D. Local Legislative Power

The Sanggunian (local legislative council) of each LGU is vested with law-making powers. The Sanggunian has the authority to enact:

• Ordinances to regulate local matters such as public health, safety, and public order.
• Appropriation ordinances for budgetary purposes.
• Tax ordinances to generate revenues for local programs.

6. Mechanisms Ensuring Local Autonomy

A. Checks and Balances

The principle of local autonomy is balanced by mechanisms to ensure that LGUs remain accountable and transparent:

• Oversight Functions of National Agencies: While LGUs have autonomy, national agencies such as the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) exercise oversight to ensure that LGUs comply with national laws and policies.

• COA Audits: The Commission on Audit (COA) has the power to audit the use of public funds by LGUs to ensure that they are properly used for local development.

• Recall: Local officials may be subject to a recall election, where the electorate can remove them from office before the end of their term for loss of confidence.

B. Inter-LGU Cooperation

The LGC encourages inter-LGU cooperation through mechanisms such as:

• Local Government Units' Alliances (LGU Alliances): LGUs may form cooperative alliances with each other to jointly address issues that cross boundaries, such as environmental protection and regional development.

• Local Special Bodies (LSBs): The LGC provides for the establishment of various consultative and decision-making bodies (e.g., Local Development Councils) that include both local officials and civil society representatives to enhance participatory governance.

7. Limitations on Local Autonomy

Despite the broad powers granted to LGUs, local autonomy is not absolute. There are limits and restrictions imposed by the Constitution, the Local Government Code, and other national laws:

• Hierarchy of Laws: LGUs must enact ordinances in accordance with national laws. National statutes and the Constitution take precedence over local ordinances.

• Subject to National Supervision: Local autonomy is always subject to the general supervision of the President. The President can intervene when LGUs act beyond their powers or when necessary to maintain public order.

• Doctrine of Local Government as “Delegate” of the National Government: LGUs are considered "creatures of the state" and derive their powers from legislation. Congress may increase or decrease their powers through subsequent laws.

8. Public International Law and Local Autonomy

The principle of local autonomy in the Philippines is consistent with international standards of governance, particularly in terms of decentralization and good governance. Local autonomy allows for:

• Local Democracy: Empowering communities to participate in decision-making aligns with principles of democracy and self-determination recognized under international law.

• Sustainable Development: Decentralization can enhance localized responses to global challenges, such as climate change, poverty, and human rights, as articulated in the UN's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Conclusion

Local autonomy in the Philippines is a fundamental principle that is constitutionally mandated and operationalized through the Local Government Code. It enables LGUs to exercise substantial control over their political, administrative, and fiscal affairs. However, local autonomy exists within the framework of national laws and is subject to general supervision by the national government to ensure that it operates in the best interests of the public. The principles of devolution, decentralization, and participatory governance shape the landscape of local governance in the country, driving more responsive and accountable local government units.

Quasi-Corporations | Classifications | Public Corporations | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Political Law and Public International Law: Local Government Law – Quasi-Corporations

I. Introduction to Public Corporations

Public corporations are entities created by law to govern and manage local affairs, vested with corporate powers necessary to carry out their functions. These corporations may exercise powers either through their corporate character (proprietary functions) or by virtue of their governmental character (governmental functions).

Under the law, public corporations are typically divided into two classifications: municipal corporations and quasi-corporations. This outline will focus specifically on quasi-corporations, their characteristics, and their role within the local government framework.

---

II. Quasi-Corporations: Definition and Legal Basis

Quasi-corporations are legal entities created by statute for a limited and special public purpose. Unlike regular municipal corporations, which have broad powers and duties over a defined territory, quasi-corporations possess more specialized functions and exist primarily to achieve specific governmental objectives.

Quasi-corporations do not enjoy the full corporate personality that municipalities or other local government units (LGUs) possess. They are considered "quasi" because, while they have certain legal powers similar to corporations (such as the ability to sue and be sued), their primary function is governmental, and their powers are limited and specialized.

These entities are created either by special legislative acts or general laws and are typically charged with the administration of special tasks that benefit a larger area or perform functions that would be inefficient for municipalities or provinces to carry out individually.

Examples of Quasi-Corporations in Philippine Law:

1. Barangay Waterworks Associations (BWAs) - Created for the administration and maintenance of local water systems in rural areas.
2. Special Economic Zones – These may be formed with special powers to promote economic development in specific geographic areas, often involving tax incentives and regulatory autonomy.
3. Barangay Councils of Local Government Units – While a barangay is a municipal corporation, certain specific functions (such as water supply or electricity distribution) may be delegated to quasi-corporate entities within barangays.
4. School Boards or Special Districts – Sometimes quasi-corporations are tasked with administering local education or health care services, typically in coordination with the national government but with operational independence in certain areas.

Legal Basis in the Philippine Constitution and Laws:

• 1987 Constitution: While the Constitution provides for the creation and governance of local governments (Art. X), quasi-corporations are typically governed by specific statutes or laws that grant them the limited legal capacity to perform specific roles.
• Local Government Code of 1991 (RA 7160): This comprehensive code covers municipal corporations but also contemplates the creation of special purpose entities which can have a quasi-corporate character.

---

III. Characteristics of Quasi-Corporations

Quasi-corporations in the Philippines are characterized by the following features:

1. Limited Powers:

   • Quasi-corporations are granted limited powers that are strictly defined by their enabling law. These powers generally pertain to a specific function or objective (e.g., managing a water district or a local economic zone).
   • Unlike fully-fledged LGUs, they do not have police powers, taxing powers (except when explicitly granted by law), or broad legislative powers.

2. Special Purpose Entities:

   • Their purpose is often tied to providing a specific public service, such as water distribution, health care, education, or regional economic development.
   • They are created when it is more efficient to delegate a specific governmental task to a specialized entity rather than a regular LGU.

3. Public Character:

   • While they have some elements of corporate personality, quasi-corporations are fundamentally public entities that serve governmental functions rather than proprietary interests.
   • The primary goal of a quasi-corporation is to fulfill a public need, making them governmental rather than purely corporate in character.

4. Creation by Statute:

   • Quasi-corporations are not organic entities but are created by legislative acts or executive orders. They are not created by local initiative but through national-level action that determines their scope and powers.

5. Limited Jurisdiction:

   • These entities often have jurisdiction over a particular area or class of individuals or properties and do not exercise broad territorial jurisdiction like a city or municipality. Their jurisdiction is tied to their specific function.

6. Funding:

   • Funding for quasi-corporations often comes from national government appropriations, grants, or specific fees collected for services rendered. They generally lack independent taxing power unless specifically conferred by law.

7. Limited Autonomy:

   • Quasi-corporations may exercise a degree of operational independence but are often subject to oversight by national government agencies or departments, such as the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) or specialized national agencies related to their specific function (e.g., water districts under the Local Water Utilities Administration).

---

IV. Differences Between Municipal Corporations and Quasi-Corporations

Aspect	Municipal Corporations	Quasi-Corporations
Powers	Broad powers, including police power and taxation	Limited powers, tied to specific statutory objectives
Scope	Governs an entire city, municipality, or province	Often limited to a special function or purpose in a specific area
Creation	Created by the Local Government Code or special law	Created by specific legislative acts or executive orders
Funding	Can generate revenue through taxation and fees	Limited revenue-raising powers; often reliant on government funding
Autonomy	High degree of autonomy from the national government	Limited autonomy, often subject to supervision or control by national agencies
Primary Purpose	Governing the general welfare of the local constituency	Fulfilling a special or technical governmental function

---

V. Functions and Powers of Quasi-Corporations

Quasi-corporations typically carry out specialized governmental functions such as:

1. Infrastructure Development:

   • Some quasi-corporations are tasked with managing and maintaining infrastructure, such as water districts or local electric cooperatives, where direct municipal administration might not be feasible.

2. Service Provision:

   • Entities like barangay water districts or health boards provide essential services to areas where local governments may lack the technical expertise or resources.

3. Regulation and Administration:

   • In cases where specialized regulation or administration is required (e.g., in Special Economic Zones), quasi-corporations are empowered to act with limited authority, sometimes with delegated regulatory powers.

4. Collaboration with National Agencies:

   • Quasi-corporations often collaborate with national agencies to implement specific policies or programs, such as environmental management, public health campaigns, or regional economic development initiatives.

---

VI. Conclusion

Quasi-corporations play a vital role in the decentralized structure of the Philippines by carrying out specialized functions that complement the broader mandates of local government units. Their creation reflects the need for targeted, efficient governance solutions in areas where full municipal or provincial oversight may be either inefficient or impractical. These entities, while limited in scope and powers, fulfill critical public functions and are essential components of the Philippine local government framework.

Their special-purpose nature distinguishes them from fully-fledged LGUs, highlighting their role in addressing specific public needs through a flexible, albeit controlled, corporate structure.

Corporate Powers of LGUs | Public Corporations | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Corporate Powers of Local Government Units (LGUs)

The Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160) governs the corporate powers of Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines. These powers enable LGUs to act as legal entities, manage local affairs, and enter into legal contracts. The purpose of conferring corporate powers is to ensure that LGUs, as public corporations, can act autonomously to perform their local functions effectively and efficiently. Below is a detailed discussion on the corporate powers of LGUs under the Local Government Code:

1. Nature of LGUs as Public Corporations

LGUs are considered public corporations, which are legal entities created by law to perform governmental and proprietary functions. As such, they possess a dual character:

• Governmental Functions: These pertain to the exercise of the State's sovereign powers delegated to the LGUs, such as police power, eminent domain, and taxation.
• Proprietary Functions: These refer to functions that relate to activities traditionally considered commercial, similar to those performed by private corporations.

2. Corporate Powers of LGUs

Under Section 22 of the Local Government Code, LGUs have three specific corporate powers:

A. To Have Continuous Succession in Its Corporate Name

An LGU, as a public corporation, exists perpetually in law and continues to operate in its corporate name regardless of changes in leadership. This continuity is necessary to ensure that the LGU can perform its duties and obligations uninterrupted, including entering into contracts and acquiring assets.

B. To Sue and Be Sued

This corporate power allows LGUs to initiate legal actions and defend themselves in court. LGUs can sue any party in their corporate capacity, and they can be sued for obligations they incur. This ensures accountability and the legal capacity to enforce rights and obligations.

• Scope of Liability: LGUs may be held liable for damages arising from their proprietary functions, but they generally enjoy immunity from suit concerning their governmental functions unless there is a waiver or legislative approval.
• Restrictions: The power to sue and be sued is limited by statutory provisions, including compliance with procedural requirements such as obtaining prior approval from the Sangguniang Bayan, Panlungsod, or Panlalawigan before entering into or settling disputes.

C. To Enter into Contracts

LGUs, through their executive officials (i.e., mayor or governor), may enter into contracts necessary for the proper exercise of their functions. This includes contracts for the provision of services, acquisition of property, or establishment of partnerships.

• Limitations: Contracts must be in line with the LGU’s powers and functions under the law, and they must comply with procedural requirements such as:

  • Authorization by the Sangguniang (council) concerned;
  • Compliance with public bidding requirements for procurement and disposal of property, as provided under Republic Act No. 9184 (Government Procurement Reform Act);
  • Adherence to budgetary limits and funding availability.

• Ultra Vires Acts: Any contract entered into by an LGU that is outside its lawful powers or without the requisite authorization is considered ultra vires and unenforceable.

3. Exercise of Corporate Powers by the Local Chief Executive

The local chief executive, such as the governor, city mayor, or municipal mayor, represents the LGU in its corporate dealings. However, the Local Government Code provides that certain acts by the local chief executive require prior authorization from the Sangguniang or legislative council, such as:

• Entering into long-term contracts;
• Loan agreements;
• Sale or lease of LGU properties.

The local chief executive is also responsible for the proper execution of contracts and ensuring that obligations are fulfilled.

4. Limitations on the Exercise of Corporate Powers

The exercise of corporate powers by LGUs is not absolute and is subject to several limitations and controls, including:

• Fiscal Autonomy: While LGUs enjoy a degree of fiscal autonomy, they must ensure that expenditures do not exceed available resources. Contractual obligations must comply with the approved local budget.
• Public Accountability: As public entities, LGUs are subject to laws on transparency, accountability, and good governance. This includes the prohibition on contracts manifesting conflict of interest, such as those involving relatives of public officials.
• Compliance with National Laws: LGUs must operate within the bounds of national laws and policies. For example, their taxing and regulatory powers cannot contravene national statutes or infringe upon the powers of national agencies.

5. LGUs as Proprietary Entities

In their capacity as public corporations, LGUs may engage in proprietary activities. These activities are undertaken primarily for profit and do not directly relate to the exercise of governmental functions. For example:

• Establishment of Economic Enterprises: LGUs can establish local economic enterprises (e.g., public markets, slaughterhouses, and transportation systems) to generate revenue for the local government.
• Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): LGUs are allowed to enter into joint ventures or partnerships with private entities for the development of public infrastructure projects or other economic endeavors. These partnerships are governed by Republic Act No. 6957 (as amended by Republic Act No. 7718), also known as the Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) Law.

6. Corporate Powers of Barangays

Even the smallest political subdivisions, such as barangays, have corporate powers. However, due to their size and limited resources, barangays have more restricted powers compared to cities, municipalities, and provinces. Their corporate powers are usually limited to:

• Providing basic services and facilities;
• Constructing and maintaining barangay infrastructure projects;
• Collecting minimal fees for certain services.

Barangays also have the power to enter into contracts and sue and be sued, though these contracts are typically limited in scope and value due to budgetary constraints.

7. Key Jurisprudence on LGU Corporate Powers

Several landmark Supreme Court rulings have shaped the understanding and application of LGU corporate powers:

• Pimentel v. Aguirre (2000): The Court ruled that LGUs enjoy a measure of fiscal autonomy and that any executive act that unduly interferes with such autonomy, such as the imposition of restrictions on their corporate powers without legal basis, is unconstitutional.
• Municipality of San Narciso v. Mendez (1995): The Supreme Court held that an LGU cannot disavow its contracts or obligations by simply claiming it was acting in its governmental capacity. LGUs are liable for obligations that arise from proprietary functions.
• Municipality of Bacoor v. IAC (1985): This case highlights the distinction between governmental and proprietary functions, holding that LGUs may be held liable for damages arising from their proprietary acts but may enjoy immunity for governmental acts, unless waived by law.

8. Conclusion

The corporate powers of LGUs are essential in enabling them to function autonomously in managing local affairs. These powers are exercised within the framework of the Local Government Code and are subject to certain limitations, such as fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability. LGUs must balance their dual roles as public corporations performing governmental functions and as entities engaging in proprietary activities to promote the welfare and development of their local communities.

Concept; Distinguished from Government-Owned or Controlled Corporations | Public Corporations | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Political Law and Public International Law > XV. Law on Local Governments > A. Public Corporations > 1. Concept; Distinguished from Government-Owned or Controlled Corporations

I. Concept of Public Corporations

A public corporation refers to an entity created by law to perform a governmental function, typically within a specific local jurisdiction. The primary purpose of public corporations is to administer local affairs in a specific territory. They are vested with a measure of self-government, allowing them to handle local matters more efficiently than the national government.

In the Philippine setting, public corporations include local government units (LGUs) such as provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays. These entities are established under the 1987 Constitution and the Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160). They are considered public corporate bodies or municipal corporations as they carry out public functions, exercising delegated governmental powers.

Key characteristics of public corporations include:

1. Creation by Statute: Public corporations, especially LGUs, are created by legislative enactments, such as national laws or ordinances issued by competent legislative bodies (e.g., Congress or Sanggunians). Their existence depends on law, and their powers are clearly defined by law.

2. Territoriality: Public corporations have a clearly defined geographical territory where they exercise jurisdiction. LGUs, for example, have the authority to regulate, manage, and administer services within their respective territorial limits.

3. Autonomy: While still subject to national oversight, public corporations are granted local autonomy under Article X of the 1987 Constitution. They enjoy legislative, executive, and fiscal powers over their local affairs.

4. Public Service Orientation: Public corporations exist to serve public interests, particularly in the delivery of basic services such as education, health, infrastructure, and public safety. Unlike private corporations, their purpose is not profit generation.

II. Distinction from Government-Owned or Controlled Corporations (GOCCs)

A Government-Owned or Controlled Corporation (GOCC) refers to a corporation created by special law or organized under the general corporation law in which the government has either full or partial ownership. The primary purpose of GOCCs is typically commercial or business-oriented, although some may also perform public service functions.

While both public corporations and GOCCs are governmental entities, there are significant differences between the two:

1. Creation and Basis of Existence

• Public Corporations (LGUs) are created directly by law (Constitution, Local Government Code, or special legislation). They are created as territorial subdivisions of the State to provide localized governmental services.
• GOCCs may be created by a special charter (e.g., Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation [PAGCOR] or the Government Service Insurance System [GSIS]) or incorporated under general corporate law (e.g., Philippine National Oil Company [PNOC]). Their establishment is primarily driven by economic or business needs.

2. Nature of Functions

• Public Corporations primarily perform governmental or public functions, such as the regulation of land use, provision of local services, and enforcement of local laws. Their focus is the public welfare within their territorial jurisdiction.
• GOCCs, on the other hand, are often created to engage in commercial or business activities, such as providing utilities (e.g., National Power Corporation [NPC]), conducting insurance services (e.g., GSIS), or engaging in strategic industries (e.g., PNOC). Some GOCCs also perform proprietary functions, where profit-making is a primary goal, although they may be subject to certain public service mandates.

3. Autonomy and Supervision

• Public Corporations are granted local autonomy under the Constitution and the Local Government Code. This means they have the power to legislate local laws (ordinances), levy taxes, and control their local affairs with minimal interference from the national government, subject to general supervision. For instance, the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) exercises general oversight but cannot intervene in purely local matters unless there is a violation of law.

• GOCCs are subject to the direct control or supervision of the national government. Many GOCCs report to a line department (e.g., National Electrification Administration [NEA] under the Department of Energy) or to a regulatory body (e.g., Governance Commission for GOCCs or GCG). The national government exerts greater control over the operations of GOCCs than it does over LGUs.

4. Revenue and Funding

• Public Corporations generally derive their revenues from local taxes, fees, and charges (e.g., real property taxes, business taxes), as well as their share of the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) from the national government. Public corporations do not operate to generate profit but to provide essential public services.

• GOCCs generate revenue through the sale of goods and services or by engaging in business activities. GOCCs are expected to be self-sustaining or profit-oriented, and many of them remit a portion of their earnings to the national treasury, depending on their profitability.

5. Legal Personality

• Public Corporations (LGUs) possess a dual character as governmental and corporate entities. In their governmental capacity, they enact ordinances, impose taxes, and maintain public order. In their corporate capacity, they may engage in proprietary functions, such as operating markets or water utilities, but these are incidental to their primary role as local governments.

• GOCCs have a purely corporate identity, even though they may serve public interests. They are governed by corporate laws (e.g., Corporation Code or their own charters) and can enter into contracts, acquire properties, sue, and be sued, much like private corporations.

6. Examples of Public Corporations vs. GOCCs

• Public Corporations: Province of Cebu, City of Manila, Municipality of Kalibo, Barangay Ayala Alabang.
• GOCCs: Philippine National Railways (PNR), Social Security System (SSS), Land Bank of the Philippines, Philippine Postal Corporation (PHLPost).

III. Summary of Key Differences

Aspect	Public Corporations (LGUs)	GOCCs
Creation	Created by law (Constitution, Local Government Code)	Created by special law or under general corporate law
Purpose	Perform governmental functions in a defined territory	Engage in business activities for profit or public service
Function	Primarily public service-oriented (local governance)	Primarily proprietary or commercial functions
Autonomy	Granted local autonomy, subject to general supervision	Under direct control or supervision of the national government
Revenue Source	Local taxes, fees, Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA)	Income from commercial activities
Examples	Provinces, Cities, Municipalities, Barangays	PAGCOR, GSIS, NPC, Landbank, SSS

IV. Constitutional and Legal Framework

1. Constitutional Provisions: The 1987 Philippine Constitution provides the basis for the existence and governance of both public corporations and GOCCs. Notably, Article X of the Constitution grants local autonomy to public corporations, emphasizing the decentralization of governance. Article XII discusses the regulation of GOCCs, particularly in areas of economic activity and public service.

2. Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160): This law is the primary legal framework governing public corporations (LGUs). It outlines the powers, functions, and responsibilities of LGUs, including their ability to legislate ordinances, levy taxes, and manage local resources.

3. Governing Laws for GOCCs: GOCCs are regulated by various statutes, including their individual charters and Republic Act No. 10149, the GOCC Governance Act of 2011, which establishes the Governance Commission for GOCCs (GCG) as the central oversight body for all GOCCs. This ensures that GOCCs adhere to good governance practices, are efficient in delivering services, and contribute to national development goals.

V. Conclusion

The distinction between public corporations and GOCCs is rooted in their creation, function, and the degree of autonomy they enjoy. Public corporations are primarily tasked with providing public services within a defined territory, while GOCCs operate under a business model, often serving proprietary functions. Understanding these differences is crucial for navigating the complexities of public administration and governance in the Philippines.

Election Protest | Remedies and Jurisdiction | ELECTION LAW

Election Protest under Philippine Law: A Detailed Discussion

An election protest is a legal remedy provided under Philippine election law that allows a losing candidate to contest the results of an election. It is a formal complaint initiated by a candidate who claims that the election process was marred by irregularities, fraud, or other forms of electoral misconduct, which affected the outcome of the election. This remedy is fundamental to ensuring that the sovereign will of the people, as expressed through the ballot, is faithfully respected and protected.

Jurisdiction and Legal Basis

Election protests are governed by several laws and rules, primarily:

1. The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines
2. The Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881)
3. The Rules of Procedure of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC)
4. Other statutes such as Republic Act No. 9369 (Automated Election Law)

Different bodies exercise jurisdiction over election protests, depending on the position contested.

1. Barangay Elections: Election protests are filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of the place where the election occurred. (Omnibus Election Code, Sec. 252)

2. Municipal and City Officials: Election protests involving municipal and city officials are within the jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts (RTCs). (Omnibus Election Code, Sec. 251)

3. Provincial, Congressional, and City Election Protests (for highly urbanized cities): Protests involving provincial officials, members of the House of Representatives, and city officials of highly urbanized cities are under the jurisdiction of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) sitting en banc or in divisions. (1987 Constitution, Art. IX-C, Sec. 2; Omnibus Election Code, Sec. 250)

4. Senators and President/Vice President: Protests involving the election of Senators are within the jurisdiction of the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET). Protests for the President and Vice President are handled by the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET). (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 17; Art. VII, Sec. 4)

Grounds for Election Protest

An election protest can be filed on the following grounds:

1. Fraud – Any fraudulent activity during the election that altered or tainted the electoral outcome. This includes tampering with election documents, vote-buying, bribery, and other deceitful practices.

2. Irregularities – These include any irregular actions by election officials that violate established rules, such as non-compliance with election procedures, improper canvassing of votes, failure to secure election documents, or unlawful counting of votes.

3. Errors in Counting or Tabulation – Miscomputation, incorrect appreciation of ballots, or malfunction of election machines can be bases for a protest, especially under the automated election system.

4. Disqualification of the Winning Candidate – If the protestant can prove that the winning candidate was disqualified by law (e.g., lacking residency, violating the rules on citizenship, or engaging in prohibited conduct like exceeding campaign spending limits), the election protest can be sustained.

5. Annulment of Election Results – In extreme cases where widespread fraud or terrorism results in a failure of elections, a protestant may seek to annul the entire election in a locality.

Filing of Election Protest

An election protest must be filed within a specific period after the proclamation of the winning candidate:

1. For municipal, city, and provincial positions, within ten (10) days after the proclamation of results.
2. For senatorial and congressional positions, within fifteen (15) days after the proclamation.
3. For the President and Vice President, the protest must be filed with the Presidential Electoral Tribunal within thirty (30) days after proclamation.

Contents of an Election Protest

The protest must contain:

1. The Cause of Action – Clear and detailed allegations of the irregularities, fraud, or illegal acts.
2. Specific Precincts or Areas – The specific areas where the alleged fraud or irregularities occurred must be identified.
3. Relief Sought – The petitioner must clearly state the remedies sought, which may include a recount of votes, annulment of the election results, or declaration of the protestant as the duly elected candidate.

Procedure in Election Protests

The procedure in election protests generally follows the rules of civil procedure but with special provisions unique to electoral contests:

1. Pleadings: The protestant files a verified protest petition, while the protestee (winning candidate) files a verified answer. No counterclaim or motion to dismiss is allowed.

2. Preliminary Conference: A preliminary conference is conducted to simplify the issues, mark documentary evidence, agree on the number of contested precincts, and delineate stipulations of fact.

3. Revision of Ballots: One of the common remedies sought in an election protest is a revision (recount) of the ballots cast in the contested precincts. Ballot boxes are opened, and the ballots are manually reviewed by the designated revisors to determine the true will of the voters.

4. Presentation of Evidence: Both the protestant and the protestee are allowed to present evidence, including testimonies, documents, and expert witnesses. In cases of electronic voting, source codes and digital data may be subject to forensic examination.

5. Promulgation of Decision: After the presentation of evidence and submissions of memoranda, the court or tribunal will issue a decision either dismissing the protest, ordering a recount or revision of votes, annulling the results of the election, or declaring a different candidate as the rightful winner.

Appeals and Finality of Decisions

1. Regional Trial Courts (RTCs) – Decisions of the RTCs in election protests involving municipal and city officials can be appealed to the COMELEC within five (5) days from receipt of the decision. The decision of the COMELEC in these cases is final and executory.

2. COMELEC – The decisions of the COMELEC in election protests involving provincial officials and members of the House of Representatives may be brought before the Supreme Court on certiorari under Rule 64 of the Rules of Court.

3. Senate and Presidential Electoral Tribunals – The decisions of the SET and the PET are final and executory. No appeal to any other body is allowed, although their decisions may be subject to a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court if there is an allegation of grave abuse of discretion.

Costs, Timeframes, and Practicalities

1. Security for Costs: The protestant is required to post a bond or security for costs in case the protest is deemed frivolous or unsuccessful.

2. Timeframe for Resolution: Election protests are supposed to be resolved swiftly, given their impact on governance. The law mandates the prompt resolution of these cases, but in practice, delays often occur, particularly in high-stakes elections. COMELEC rules stipulate that the revision process should not exceed six months from the date of commencement.

3. Execution Pending Appeal: In some cases, a decision in an election protest may be executed pending appeal, especially if there is strong evidence that the protestant won the election.

Special Considerations in Automated Elections

The advent of automated elections in the Philippines has introduced new dimensions to election protests:

1. Electronic Data: In an election protest, the protestant may request the decryption and review of electronic data such as the vote count in the precinct count optical scan (PCOS) machines or vote-counting machines (VCMs). The integrity of digital files and the source code may also be challenged.

2. Digital Forensic Examination: With the introduction of the automated election system, forensic examination of data, machines, and other technical aspects has become an essential part of the protest process, especially when irregularities in transmission, data manipulation, or software errors are alleged.

Conclusion

Election protests are a crucial safeguard in ensuring the integrity of the democratic process in the Philippines. They provide a legal avenue for aggrieved candidates to contest electoral results marred by fraud or irregularities. However, these cases are often time-consuming and expensive, and it is essential for parties involved to have a thorough understanding of the laws and procedures governing election contests. Jurisdictional rules, filing deadlines, procedural requirements, and the nature of evidence (whether manual or electronic) all play pivotal roles in the resolution of election protests. As such, successful navigation of these cases requires meticulous legal strategy and an in-depth grasp of both political law and public international law.

Prosecution of Election Offenses [Exclude: Penal Provisions] | ELECTION LAW

Election Law: Prosecution of Election Offenses (Excluding Penal Provisions)

I. Introduction

The prosecution of election offenses in the Philippines is a crucial aspect of election law, ensuring that violations during elections are properly addressed to uphold the integrity of the electoral process. This encompasses a well-structured legal framework, from the identification of offenses to the institutions responsible for prosecuting and adjudicating election-related violations. The Constitution, laws, regulations, and jurisprudence form the core of this framework.

---

II. Legal Framework Governing Election Offenses

1. 1987 Constitution of the Philippines:

   • The Constitution mandates the conduct of free, fair, and honest elections. Any attempt to subvert this mandate through illegal acts during the election process is considered an election offense.

2. Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881):

   • The Omnibus Election Code is the principal law that governs election offenses in the Philippines. It enumerates various election offenses, prescribes penalties, and outlines procedures for prosecution.
   • Election offenses include acts such as vote-buying, voter coercion, terrorism, unlawful electioneering, tampering with election returns, and other violations that directly impact the conduct and results of elections.

3. Republic Act No. 9369 (Automated Election Law):

   • Amendments to the election law to accommodate automated elections have also introduced new types of election offenses, particularly related to the integrity of automated election systems.

4. COMELEC Rules of Procedure:

   • The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has its own procedural rules that govern the investigation, prosecution, and adjudication of election offenses. These rules supplement the provisions of the Omnibus Election Code.

5. Relevant Jurisprudence:

   • Numerous Supreme Court decisions interpret and clarify the provisions on election offenses. These jurisprudential rulings help shape the enforcement and prosecution of election laws.

---

III. Election Offenses Defined

Election offenses can be broadly categorized as follows:

1. Vote-buying and Vote-selling:

   • It is illegal to directly or indirectly offer, promise, or give money, material benefits, or anything of value in exchange for a vote.
   • The act of selling one's vote is also an offense.

2. Coercion, Intimidation, and Terrorism:

   • Any act that forces or intimidates voters into casting their votes for a particular candidate, or dissuades them from voting, constitutes an election offense.

3. Electioneering:

   • Electioneering is any partisan political activity done within the polling precinct or within prohibited areas on election day.
   • Unauthorized distribution of campaign materials during the prohibited period is considered an election offense.

4. Tampering with Election Documents:

   • Tampering with election returns, certificates of canvass, or any other election documents is considered a serious election offense.

5. Illegal Appointment of Election Officials:

   • The appointment of unauthorized individuals to perform election duties or tampering with the list of election officials constitutes an offense.

6. Interference with Election Machines:

   • Under the Automated Election Law, any unauthorized tampering, interference, or manipulation of automated election equipment or software is an offense.

7. Unlawful Voting:

   • Multiple voting, using fictitious names, or impersonating another voter are all considered unlawful voting practices.

---

IV. Who Can Be Prosecuted for Election Offenses?

Any person, whether a candidate, voter, election official, or private individual, can be prosecuted for committing an election offense. This includes:

1. Candidates:

   • Candidates who engage in unlawful campaign activities, such as vote-buying or coercing voters, can be prosecuted.

2. Voters:

   • Voters who engage in acts like vote-selling, multiple voting, or impersonating another voter are subject to prosecution.

3. Election Officials:

   • Public officials, particularly members of the Board of Election Inspectors (BEIs), COMELEC personnel, or other designated officials who violate election rules, are liable for election offenses.

4. Private Individuals and Groups:

   • Third parties, including political organizations, private groups, or individual actors who interfere with the electoral process, may also be prosecuted.

---

V. Institutions Involved in the Prosecution of Election Offenses

1. Commission on Elections (COMELEC):

   • Investigative Function:

     • COMELEC, through its Law Department, is tasked with the investigation and prosecution of election offenses. It has the power to issue subpoenas, require the attendance of witnesses, and conduct investigations into election violations.

   • Prosecution Function:

     • After investigating an election offense, COMELEC may file the appropriate charges before the courts. It has exclusive jurisdiction over the prosecution of election offenses.
     • In some cases, the COMELEC can deputize the Department of Justice (DOJ) or the Office of the Ombudsman to assist in prosecuting election-related cases.

   • Enforcement Powers:

     • COMELEC may also call upon law enforcement agencies, such as the Philippine National Police (PNP) or the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), to assist in the enforcement of election laws.

2. Department of Justice (DOJ):

   • The DOJ assists in the prosecution of election offenses by providing support to COMELEC. It may act as the prosecutorial arm when deputized by COMELEC, particularly in complex or large-scale cases.

3. Courts:

   • Regional Trial Courts (RTC):
     • The RTCs have jurisdiction over election offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding six years.
   • Municipal Trial Courts (MTC):
     • MTCs handle election offenses punishable by imprisonment of less than six years.
   • COMELEC’s Adjudicatory Powers:
     • In administrative cases involving election offenses committed by election officials, COMELEC itself may render decisions and impose sanctions.

4. Special Courts:

   • In some instances, special courts or divisions may be designated to handle election offense cases, particularly in situations where an expedited resolution is necessary.

---

VI. Procedure for the Prosecution of Election Offenses

1. Filing of Complaints:

   • Any person may file a complaint for an election offense before the COMELEC. The complaint must be under oath and accompanied by supporting documents or evidence.

2. Preliminary Investigation:

   • The COMELEC Law Department conducts a preliminary investigation to determine whether there is sufficient ground to hold the respondent liable for the election offense.
   • If a prima facie case is established, COMELEC files the necessary information before the appropriate court.

3. Prosecution in Court:

   • Once a case is filed in court, the normal rules of criminal procedure apply. The prosecutor (whether from COMELEC or the DOJ) presents evidence, and the accused has the right to present a defense.
   • Trial courts are required to resolve election offenses speedily, recognizing the urgency of adjudicating these cases promptly, especially when the offense may affect the outcome of an election.

4. Appeals:

   • Decisions of the lower courts on election offense cases can be appealed to the higher courts (Court of Appeals or Supreme Court) following the ordinary rules of criminal procedure.

---

VII. Special Rules and Considerations

1. Election Period:

   • Election offenses committed during the election period (as determined by COMELEC) are given special attention and higher penalties. The election period typically covers the time from the filing of candidacies to the conclusion of the election and proclamation of winners.

2. Disqualification:

   • In addition to criminal prosecution, candidates found guilty of election offenses may also be disqualified from holding public office or being proclaimed winners in an election. This can occur even before the election offense case is resolved if COMELEC issues a disqualification order based on sufficient evidence.

3. Prescription of Election Offenses:

   • Election offenses must be prosecuted within five (5) years from the date of their commission. After this period, the offense may no longer be subject to prosecution due to prescription.

---

VIII. Conclusion

The prosecution of election offenses in the Philippines plays a pivotal role in safeguarding the sanctity of the electoral process. It involves a detailed legal framework designed to address various forms of election-related violations, supported by key institutions like COMELEC, the DOJ, and the courts. Ensuring prompt investigation, prosecution, and adjudication of election offenses is essential for maintaining public trust in the electoral system and upholding democratic principles.

Recall | Remedies and Jurisdiction | ELECTION LAW

RECALL UNDER ELECTION LAW (POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW)

I. Introduction to Recall

Recall is a democratic process under Philippine election law that allows the electorate to remove a local elected official from office before the end of their term. It is an exceptional remedy vested in the people to express dissatisfaction with the performance or conduct of an incumbent official, specifically at the local level. Recall should not be confused with impeachment, which is applicable to higher-ranking officials and follows a different set of legal principles.

The authority and procedures for recall in the Philippines are governed by the Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160) and are supplemented by relevant jurisprudence and Comelec (Commission on Elections) rules and resolutions.

II. Constitutional and Statutory Basis

• 1987 Constitution: The constitutional foundation for recall is found in Section 3 of Article X, which provides that "The Congress shall enact a local government code which shall provide for a more responsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a system of decentralization." The same provision mandates that a local government code should include mechanisms for "recall, initiative, and referendum."

• Local Government Code of 1991 (R.A. No. 7160): Recall is specifically governed by Sections 69-75 of the Local Government Code. These sections establish the grounds, procedures, and limitations regarding the recall of local officials.

III. Grounds for Recall

Recall is not dependent on any specific administrative or criminal violation. The grounds are dissatisfaction of the people with the performance of the local official. The reasons can be political, administrative, or even moral in nature. The key point is that the electorate must express a lack of confidence in their elected official, typically based on the official’s actions during their tenure.

IV. Who May Be Recalled

Under Section 69 of the Local Government Code, recall may only be initiated against the following officials after they have served at least one (1) year of their term:

1. Provincial Governor
2. Vice Governor
3. Members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan (Provincial Board)
4. City or Municipal Mayor
5. Vice Mayor
6. Members of the Sangguniang Panlungsod (City Council) or Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council)

Note: Barangay officials are not subject to recall under the provisions of the Local Government Code.

V. Who May Initiate Recall

There are two ways by which recall may be initiated:

1. By a Preparatory Recall Assembly (PRA):

   • A Preparatory Recall Assembly is composed of all elected local officials in the concerned local government unit (LGU). For provincial officials, it would include mayors, vice mayors, and sangguniang bayan members. For city and municipal officials, it includes all barangay captains and sangguniang barangay members.
   • The PRA may initiate the recall by a majority vote of its members.

2. By Petition of the Registered Voters:

   • Section 70 allows recall to be initiated by a petition signed by a specified percentage of the registered voters in the concerned LGU. The required percentage varies depending on the number of registered voters:
     • For LGUs with up to 20,000 voters, at least 25% of the registered voters must sign the petition.
     • For LGUs with 20,000 to 75,000 voters, at least 20% of the registered voters.
     • For LGUs with more than 75,000 voters, at least 15% of the registered voters.

VI. Timing and Limitations on Recall

1. Time Period for Recall:

   • Recall may be initiated only after the official has served at least one (1) year in office from the date of their assumption.
   • A recall election must not be conducted within one year before a regular local election. This means that the recall process cannot be used as a political weapon in the immediate lead-up to the regular elections.
   • No elected official can be subjected to more than one recall election within the same term of office.

2. Limitation on the Conduct of the Recall Election:

   • Recall elections must be scheduled and conducted by the Commission on Elections (Comelec), which oversees the entire process, from the verification of signatures to the conduct of the actual recall election.
   • The Comelec is mandated to verify the sufficiency of the petition for recall within 15 days from its submission and, if found sufficient, schedule a recall election within 30 days for cities and municipalities and 45 days for provinces.

VII. Procedure for Recall

1. Filing of the Recall Petition:

   • A verified petition for recall must be filed with the local office of the Comelec. In cases where the petition is initiated by voters, it must be accompanied by signatures and thumbmarks of the required percentage of the electorate.

2. Comelec Verification and Signature Validation:

   • Once the petition is filed, the Comelec is tasked with verifying the sufficiency and authenticity of the signatures within 15 days. The Comelec may conduct a random check to ensure that the signatures are genuine.

3. Scheduling and Conduct of Recall Election:

   • Upon finding the petition sufficient, the Comelec schedules the recall election within 30 days (for cities and municipalities) or 45 days (for provinces). The election follows the usual rules of local elections.

4. Candidates in the Recall Election:

   • The incumbent official is automatically considered a candidate in the recall election. Other candidates may file their certificates of candidacy within a period set by the Comelec.

VIII. Effects of Recall

1. If the Incumbent Wins:

   • If the incumbent official wins the recall election, they will continue to serve the remainder of their term. There is no further recall allowed for that term.

2. If the Incumbent Loses:

   • If the incumbent loses, the winner of the recall election will serve the remainder of the term. However, the official removed via recall is not disqualified from running in the next regular election for the same position.

IX. Remedies and Jurisdiction

1. COMELEC’s Role:

   • The Commission on Elections (Comelec) has exclusive jurisdiction over the conduct of recall elections. It is responsible for verifying the recall petition, setting the election date, and ensuring the proper conduct of the recall election.
   • Any disputes or questions relating to the recall process (e.g., the sufficiency of the petition, the validity of the election) are generally within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Comelec.

2. Judicial Review:

   • Decisions of the Comelec regarding the recall process may be subject to judicial review by the Supreme Court only on grounds of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction under Section 7, Article IX-A of the 1987 Constitution.
   • However, courts generally defer to the Comelec’s findings in the absence of manifest errors or abuses.

X. Notable Jurisprudence on Recall

1. Aguinaldo v. Comelec (1992): This case confirmed that the grounds for recall need not be limited to criminal or administrative offenses, but may also arise out of political dissatisfaction. The ruling affirmed the broad discretion given to the electorate in initiating recall proceedings.

2. Angobung v. Comelec (1996): This case clarified that the signature verification process for recall petitions must be thorough and that the Comelec is empowered to verify the sufficiency of signatures in recall petitions.

XI. Conclusion

Recall is a mechanism that allows voters to hold their local officials accountable during their term of office. The process is governed primarily by the Local Government Code and Comelec rules. While it is a powerful tool of direct democracy, it is bounded by strict procedural rules, such as the timing and signature requirements, to prevent abuse. Ultimately, the recall election is a manifestation of the people's sovereignty, allowing them to express their will regarding the leadership of their local government.

Quo Warranto | Remedies and Jurisdiction | ELECTION LAW

Topic: Quo Warranto in Election Law under Political Law and Public International Law

---

Overview of Quo Warranto as a Legal Remedy

Quo Warranto is a legal remedy used to challenge a person's right to hold a public office. It stems from common law but is incorporated into the legal system of the Philippines through its Constitution and statutory law. In the context of Election Law, it is particularly important in determining the legitimacy of public officials' tenure, including those elected through popular vote, or even those appointed to public office.

Quo Warranto can be initiated to challenge the eligibility, qualifications, or legal basis for holding public office. In essence, it questions whether an individual has the legal authority to occupy a position or exercise powers attached to it.

---

Constitutional and Statutory Basis of Quo Warranto in the Philippines

1. Constitutional Basis:

• Article VIII, Section 5(1) of the 1987 Constitution provides that the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over quo warranto petitions involving public officers or employees.

2. Statutory Basis:

• The Rules of Court (Rule 66) governs the procedure for quo warranto actions.
• Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881) covers provisions relating to electoral disputes, including quo warranto as a remedy in cases involving qualifications of elected officials.

---

Quo Warranto in the Context of Election Law

In Election Law, quo warranto is a legal action brought to challenge the eligibility or qualifications of an elected official. This is separate from an election protest, which contests the actual election results based on issues like fraud or irregularities. A quo warranto petition may be filed to question the validity of a public officer's assumption to office on the basis of ineligibility or disqualification under the law.

Who May File a Quo Warranto Petition?

1. Solicitor General - As the principal law officer of the government, the Solicitor General has the authority to bring quo warranto actions on behalf of the State when public offices are involved.

2. Any Individual - Any individual who claims to be entitled to the position, or a citizen who has a clear interest in the matter, may file a quo warranto petition.

3. Private Complainants - In the case of electoral offices, individuals who believe the respondent is unlawfully holding office due to disqualification or ineligibility may file.

Grounds for Quo Warranto in Election Law

1. Lack of Qualifications or Eligibility:

   • A petition for quo warranto may be filed against an official if it is claimed that they do not possess the qualifications required by law to hold the position.
   • This includes instances where a candidate fails to meet the minimum requirements of citizenship, residency, age, and other statutory qualifications at the time of filing their certificate of candidacy or assumption of office.

2. Disqualification:

   • Officials can be disqualified from office on legal grounds such as conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, failure to file the proper tax returns, or engaging in election offenses.

3. Fraudulent Qualifications:

   • If a candidate misrepresents material facts about their eligibility during the campaign or filing of candidacy, a quo warranto petition can be filed to remove them from office.

4. Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Jurisdiction:

   • Quo warranto can be filed with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) in the case of elective offices. The COMELEC has quasi-judicial powers and can decide on electoral cases involving local and national elections, including issues of eligibility through quo warranto.

Key Procedural Elements of Quo Warranto Petitions in Election Law

1. When to File:

   • Under Rule 66 of the Rules of Court, a quo warranto petition must be filed within one year after the cause of action arises. In the context of elections, the one-year period usually begins from the time the public officer assumes office.

2. Venue:

   • Quo warranto petitions involving local officials are filed with the appropriate Regional Trial Courts (RTCs).
   • For national officials, such as members of Congress, petitions are filed with the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) or the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET), depending on the specific public office involved.
   • For elective officials whose qualifications fall under the jurisdiction of the COMELEC, the quo warranto petition must be filed with the COMELEC.

3. Nature of Proceedings:

   • Quo warranto proceedings are civil in nature, focusing solely on the legal right of the respondent to occupy the office, as opposed to electoral protests which deal with the integrity of the electoral process.

4. Burden of Proof:

   • The burden of proof lies on the petitioner to demonstrate that the respondent is ineligible or disqualified from holding the office. The respondent must then provide a defense to refute the claims.

5. Effects of a Successful Quo Warranto Petition:

   • If the court or tribunal grants the petition, the respondent is removed from office and deemed to have never been legally qualified to occupy the position. The position is considered vacant, and appropriate succession or special elections may take place to fill the vacancy.

6. No Prescription in Cases of Fraud:

   • If the case involves fraud or the concealment of disqualifying facts (such as false claims about qualifications), the one-year period for filing does not apply, and the quo warranto petition can be filed after the discovery of such fraud.

---

Quo Warranto and the Supreme Court: The Sereno Doctrine

The Quo Warranto case of former Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno (Republic v. Sereno, G.R. No. 237428) significantly expanded the application of the quo warranto remedy. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that quo warranto can be a remedy to challenge appointment to public office, not just elective office. This ruling was based on allegations of ineligibility concerning the submission of Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN).

Key Takeaways from the Sereno Doctrine:

1. Quo Warranto Can Apply to Appointed Officials:

   • Prior to the Sereno case, quo warranto was traditionally applied to elective positions. However, the ruling allowed it to be applied to remove an appointed official on the grounds of lack of qualifications or non-compliance with eligibility requirements.

2. Judicial Power to Review Appointments:

   • The case established that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review the appointment of public officials via quo warranto petitions, even if they occupy positions in co-equal branches of government.

3. Implications for Future Public Officers:

   • This ruling potentially expanded the scope of quo warranto petitions to challenge other constitutional officers, especially on the grounds of eligibility, qualifications, or appointment irregularities.

---

Remedy of Quo Warranto vs. Election Protest

It is crucial to differentiate between a quo warranto petition and an election protest:

1. Election Protest:

   • Challenges the process and result of the election, typically alleging fraud, vote-buying, or other irregularities.
   • Filed within a short period after the proclamation of winners (usually within 10 days for local elections).

2. Quo Warranto:

   • Challenges the eligibility or qualification of the elected official, regardless of how the election was conducted.
   • Can be filed up to one year after the official assumes office or upon discovery of fraud.

Both remedies can exist simultaneously but are separate and distinct, providing different grounds and procedures for removing an elected official.

---

Conclusion

Quo warranto in Philippine Election Law serves as a significant legal remedy to address issues concerning the qualifications and eligibility of public officers. Whether through the courts, COMELEC, or the tribunals for legislative offices, it ensures that only those who are legally qualified can occupy public office. The broadened application of quo warranto, especially in the aftermath of the Sereno case, underscores its evolving importance in safeguarding the legitimacy of public authority in the Philippines.

Pre-Proclamation Controversy | Remedies and Jurisdiction | ELECTION LAW

Pre-Proclamation Controversy under Philippine Election Law

A Pre-Proclamation Controversy (PPC) is a remedy in election law that seeks to question irregularities in the canvassing of votes and other proceedings related to the proclamation of winners in elections. Unlike an election protest, a PPC focuses primarily on the process of canvassing, the election returns, and certificates of canvass, without delving into the actual conduct of voting or the integrity of the ballots.

In the Philippines, PPCs are governed by the Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881) and relevant jurisprudence. The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) and, in some cases, the courts, have jurisdiction over PPCs.

1. Nature of Pre-Proclamation Controversies

PPCs are summary proceedings. The objective is to ensure that the canvassing of votes and proclamation of winners are done correctly and in accordance with law. The controversies are designed to be resolved expeditiously to avoid delays in the proclamation of winning candidates.

PPCs are initiated to raise issues that affect the accuracy of the canvassing of election results, including allegations of tampering, discrepancies, or irregularities in election documents (e.g., election returns or certificates of canvass).

A PPC does not deal with the actual conduct of voting or the validity of the votes cast, as these matters are the subject of an election protest.

2. Grounds for Pre-Proclamation Controversy

Under Section 243 of the Omnibus Election Code, the following grounds are available for raising a pre-proclamation controversy:

• Illegal composition or proceedings of the Board of Canvassers (BOC) – If the BOC is improperly constituted, or its proceedings violate the law, a candidate can raise a PPC.

• Canvassed election returns are incomplete, contain material defects, or bear erasures or alterations that appear to be tampered with.

• Discrepancies in the election returns – There are material inconsistencies in the figures reflected in the election returns, which call into question the authenticity or accuracy of the canvass.

• Election returns appear to be tampered with or falsified, which would affect the results of the election.

• Certificate of Canvass is incomplete – The failure of the BOC to include all valid election returns or to omit others would be a ground for a PPC.

3. Who May File

Any candidate, political party, or coalition of political parties who participated in the election and who believes that there has been a violation of election laws or irregularity in the canvassing process may file a PPC.

4. Jurisdiction

• COMELEC has primary jurisdiction over pre-proclamation controversies.

  • For presidential and vice-presidential elections, the Congress (National Board of Canvassers) has jurisdiction over canvassing, and thus, PPCs related to these offices are brought before Congress.
  • For local elections, the Board of Canvassers (BOC) at the municipal, city, or provincial level handles the canvassing, but appeals or PPCs are within the jurisdiction of the COMELEC.

  Appeals from decisions of the BOCs in relation to pre-proclamation controversies can be raised before the COMELEC En Banc.

• In some instances, the courts may have jurisdiction, particularly the Supreme Court, exercising its jurisdiction as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) for presidential and vice-presidential elections, and the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) or House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) for senatorial and congressional elections, respectively.

5. When to File a Pre-Proclamation Controversy

A PPC must be filed before the proclamation of the winning candidate. Once a candidate has been proclaimed, the remedy of a PPC is no longer available, and the aggrieved party must resort to an election protest or quo warranto proceedings.

An exception exists if the proclamation is illegal or made with manifest disregard of the law, where a PPC may still be entertained after proclamation, but only to nullify the proclamation.

6. Summary Procedure

Pre-proclamation controversies are intended to be summary in nature. The law requires that they be decided quickly to avoid unduly delaying the proclamation of winning candidates. Thus, the proceedings are often conducted without the full formalities of a trial, and the evidence is largely documentary (i.e., election returns, certificates of canvass).

The law mandates that pre-proclamation controversies be resolved within five days from the date the controversy is submitted for resolution, barring any significant delays or complexities.

7. Suspension of Proclamation

If a PPC is filed, the proclamation of the winning candidate is typically suspended until the resolution of the controversy. However, if the PPC involves matters that would not affect the results of the election (e.g., minor discrepancies in a few precincts), the proclamation may proceed while the issues are resolved.

8. Appeals and Judicial Review

Decisions of the BOCs in relation to PPCs can be appealed to the COMELEC, which exercises either quasi-judicial or appellate jurisdiction, depending on the case.

• COMELEC En Banc decides on appeals from the division rulings regarding PPCs.
• Decisions of the COMELEC En Banc in pre-proclamation controversies can be appealed via certiorari to the Supreme Court, under Rule 64 of the Rules of Court.

9. Precedents and Jurisprudence

Philippine jurisprudence has consistently held that the purpose of a PPC is to correct errors in the canvassing process before a proclamation is made. Once a proclamation is legally made, the remedy shifts to an election protest, unless the proclamation is tainted by gross irregularities or made in defiance of law.

Several rulings have clarified the distinction between PPCs and election protests. The Supreme Court has ruled that a PPC does not allow a party to contest the actual validity of the votes or the integrity of the ballots, which is the domain of election protests.

10. Limitations

• PPCs are limited to the canvassing process and do not extend to the conduct of voting or the correctness of the counting of votes.
• The relief sought in a PPC is the suspension or nullification of the proclamation based on defects in the canvass or the election returns, not the actual declaration of another candidate as the winner. The latter is reserved for election protests.
• Once a valid proclamation is made, PPCs generally cannot be entertained.

11. Recent Amendments and Developments

Recent COMELEC resolutions, particularly under the Automated Election System (AES), have streamlined the process of PPCs. With the use of automated canvassing and transmission of election returns, the grounds for PPCs may be limited to issues involving the accuracy and integrity of the electronically transmitted results, rather than the manual discrepancies often seen in prior elections.

---

This outline presents a comprehensive understanding of Pre-Proclamation Controversy under Philippine Election Law, covering all key aspects from legal grounds, jurisdiction, and procedure, to relevant limitations and recent developments.

Failure of Election; Call for Special Election | Remedies and Jurisdiction | ELECTION LAW

Topic: Failure of Election and Call for Special Election in Philippine Election Law

I. Legal Framework for Failure of Election and Special Elections

The provisions concerning the failure of election and the call for a special election in the Philippines are primarily governed by:

1. 1987 Constitution of the Philippines
2. Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881)
3. Republic Act No. 7166 (Synchronized Elections Law)
4. Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Rules and Resolutions

These laws set the procedural and substantive requirements when elections fail and how the remedy of a special election is initiated.

---

II. Failure of Election: Grounds and Definition

Under Section 6 of the Omnibus Election Code, a failure of election may be declared when any of the following occurs:

1. Force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes which prevent the holding of elections in any precinct or precincts;
2. The election in a particular precinct is suspended before the votes are fully cast;
3. The election results in a failure to elect, i.e., no candidate is elected due to the circumstances enumerated above;
4. The election returns are precluded or cannot be ascertained due to causes mentioned above.

The circumstances leading to failure must be sufficiently grave to render it impossible to hold or conclude the election, or prevent the results from being determined with reasonable certainty.

---

III. Procedure for Declaration of Failure of Election

The declaration of failure of election is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). The following are key procedural requirements:

1. Petition for Declaration of Failure of Election

   • A petition for the declaration of failure of election may be filed by any candidate, political party, or group, or any voter in the affected area.
   • The petition must be filed with the COMELEC within 30 days from the occurrence of the cause of failure of election.

2. Summary Proceeding

   • The COMELEC is required to conduct a summary proceeding to determine whether the conditions for declaring a failure of election exist.

3. COMELEC's Power to Motu Proprio Declare Failure of Election

   • The COMELEC may, on its own initiative, declare a failure of election without a petition if it has reasonable grounds to believe that the circumstances warrant such declaration.

---

IV. Causes and Conditions for Failure of Election

The essential elements of a valid declaration of failure of election are:

1. Existence of one of the enumerated causes (force majeure, violence, fraud, terrorism, etc.);
2. The cause prevented the holding of elections, or prevented the voting, or caused suspension of voting, or results could not be determined;
3. The petition must be filed within 30 days of the occurrence of the cause.

The declaration is jurisdictionally limited to precincts where elections were not held or where election results were uncertain due to the enumerated causes.

---

V. Call for Special Elections

When the COMELEC declares a failure of election, it is required to schedule a special election. The procedure for the call for a special election is as follows:

1. Scheduling of Special Election

   • The COMELEC, after declaring a failure of election, shall set a date for a special election. This should be done within 45 days from the date of the failure of election (except in cases involving the Presidency and Vice-Presidency, where it should be done within 30 days).

2. Notice and Dissemination

   • The COMELEC must give adequate public notice of the special election, which includes publication in appropriate forums and communication to political parties and candidates.

3. Same Rules Apply

   • The special election is subject to the same rules as regular elections, including procedures for voting, canvassing, and resolving electoral contests.

4. Voting in Special Elections

   • Only voters registered in the affected precincts may participate in the special election. The list of voters is based on the same voters' list used during the original election.

---

VI. Effect of Failure of Election on Electoral Offices

In cases of failure of election, the incumbents continue to hold office until their successors are elected and qualified. This is supported by the constitutional principle of "hold-over," ensuring continuity of governance until the special election is held and new officials are duly proclaimed.

---

VII. Special Provisions in National Elections (Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections)

For presidential and vice-presidential elections, the Constitution provides for a special rule under Article VII, Section 10:

• If the elections for President or Vice-President fail, a special election must be called and held within 30 days from the failure of election.

---

VIII. Jurisprudence on Failure of Election

The Supreme Court of the Philippines has provided clarity on certain points regarding the declaration of failure of elections in various cases:

1. Jurisdiction of COMELEC: The COMELEC has the exclusive power to determine and declare a failure of election. This power cannot be usurped by any other governmental body, including the judiciary.

2. Substantial Evidence: In cases where a declaration of failure of election is sought, substantial evidence of the grounds (force majeure, terrorism, fraud, etc.) must be shown. Speculative or unsubstantiated claims are insufficient.

3. Timeliness: Strict compliance with the 30-day rule for filing a petition for failure of election is required. Late petitions are generally dismissed unless exceptional circumstances justify the delay.

---

IX. Conclusion

The legal framework governing failure of election and the call for special elections in the Philippines is designed to ensure that elections are conducted fairly, with the electorate’s will accurately reflected in election outcomes. COMELEC plays a central role in investigating and determining whether elections have failed and in organizing special elections as a remedy. All parties involved in an electoral process should be vigilant in ensuring that the rules on failure of election are applied correctly and promptly to avoid prolonged vacancies in electoral offices.